These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

230 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23153252)

  • 21. Acceptable Noise Levels and Preferred Signal-to-noise Ratios for Speech and Music.
    Lee D; Lewis JD; Johnstone PM; Plyler PN
    Ear Hear; 2022; 43(3):1013-1022. PubMed ID: 34759206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. English vowel identification in long-term speech-shaped noise and multi-talker babble for English and Chinese listeners.
    Mi L; Tao S; Wang W; Dong Q; Jin SH; Liu C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 May; 133(5):EL391-7. PubMed ID: 23656099
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effects of low harmonics on tone identification in natural and vocoded speech.
    Liu C; Azimi B; Tahmina Q; Hu Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Nov; 132(5):EL378-84. PubMed ID: 23145698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Talker- and language-specific effects on speech intelligibility in noise assessed with bilingual talkers: Which language is more robust against noise and reverberation?
    Hochmuth S; Jürgens T; Brand T; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():23-34. PubMed ID: 26486466
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Talker-listener accent interactions in speech-in-noise recognition: effects of prosodic manipulation as a function of language experience.
    Pinet M; Iverson P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Sep; 128(3):1357-65. PubMed ID: 20815470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Relationship between speech recognition in noise and sparseness.
    Li G; Lutman ME; Wang S; Bleeck S
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Feb; 51(2):75-82. PubMed ID: 22107445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The effect of hearing aid signal-processing schemes on acceptable noise levels: perception and prediction.
    Wu YH; Stangl E
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):333-41. PubMed ID: 23334355
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Internationally comparable screening tests for listening in noise in several European languages: the German digit triplet test as an optimization prototype.
    Zokoll MA; Wagener KC; Brand T; Buschermöhle M; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Sep; 51(9):697-707. PubMed ID: 22762202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Predicting speech intelligibility based on the signal-to-noise envelope power ratio after modulation-frequency selective processing.
    Jørgensen S; Dau T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1475-87. PubMed ID: 21895088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Acceptable range of speech level in noisy sound fields for young adults and elderly persons.
    Sato H; Morimoto M; Ota R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1411-9. PubMed ID: 21895082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Formant discrimination of speech and non-speech sounds for English and Chinese listeners.
    Liu C; Tao S; Wang W; Dong Q
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):EL189-95. PubMed ID: 22979831
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The effect of noise envelope modulation on quality judgments of noisy speech.
    Jin IK; Kates JM; Arehart KH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Oct; 132(4):EL277-83. PubMed ID: 23039565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Acceptance of background noise levels in bilingual (Korean-English) listeners.
    von Hapsburg D; Bahng J
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2006 Oct; 17(9):649-58. PubMed ID: 17039767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Measurement and prediction of the acceptable noise level for single-microphone noise reduction algorithms.
    Fredelake S; Holube I; Schlueter A; Hansen M
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Apr; 51(4):299-308. PubMed ID: 22316007
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Performance-intensity functions of Mandarin word recognition tests in noise: test dialect and listener language effects.
    Liu D; Shi LF
    Am J Audiol; 2013 Jun; 22(1):147-56. PubMed ID: 23800810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Acceptable noise levels in preschool children with normal hearing.
    Bryan MF; Franklin C; Ware KS; Horne R
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Oct; 24(9):823-31; quiz 891-2. PubMed ID: 24224989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Influence of noise type on speech reception thresholds across four languages measured with matrix sentence tests.
    Hochmuth S; Kollmeier B; Brand T; Jürgens T
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():62-70. PubMed ID: 26097982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Second-language experience and speech-in-noise recognition: effects of talker-listener accent similarity.
    Pinet M; Iverson P; Huckvale M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1653-62. PubMed ID: 21895102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Measuring effectiveness of semantic cues in degraded English sentences in non-native listeners.
    Shi LF
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Jan; 53(1):30-9. PubMed ID: 24003982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Reference sound pressure level for Korean speech audiometry.
    Han H; Lee J; Cho S; Kim J; Lee K; Choi WD
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):59-62. PubMed ID: 21047297
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.