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 *

441 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23363193)

  • 1. Can older adults enhance the intelligibility of their speech?
    Smiljanic R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Feb; 133(2):EL129-35. PubMed ID: 23363193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Information-bearing acoustic change outperforms duration in predicting intelligibility of full-spectrum and noise-vocoded sentences.
    Stilp CE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1518-29. PubMed ID: 24606287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss.
    Fogerty D; Ahlstrom JB; Bologna WJ; Dubno JR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jun; 137(6):3487-501. PubMed ID: 26093436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Sentence perception in listening conditions having similar speech intelligibility indices.
    Gustafson SJ; Pittman AL
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):34-40. PubMed ID: 21047291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The intelligibility of Lombard speech for non-native listeners.
    Cooke M; Lecumberri ML
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):1120-9. PubMed ID: 22894231
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. How do aging and age-related hearing loss affect the ability to communicate effectively in challenging communicative conditions?
    Hazan V; Tuomainen O; Tu L; Kim J; Davis C; Brungart D; Sheffield B
    Hear Res; 2018 Nov; 369():33-41. PubMed ID: 29941310
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Acoustic correlates of vowel intelligibility in clear and conversational speech for young normal-hearing and elderly hearing-impaired listeners.
    Ferguson SH; Quené H
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jun; 135(6):3570-84. PubMed ID: 24907820
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Recognition memory in noise for speech of varying intelligibility.
    Gilbert RC; Chandrasekaran B; Smiljanic R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):389-99. PubMed ID: 24437779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Impact of talker variability on word recognition in non-native listeners.
    van Dommelen WA; Hazan V
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1690-9. PubMed ID: 22978897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Hybridizing conversational and clear speech to determine the degree of contribution of acoustic features to intelligibility.
    Kain A; Amano-Kusumoto A; Hosom JP
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Oct; 124(4):2308-19. PubMed ID: 19062869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effects of noise suppression on intelligibility. II: An attempt to validate physical metrics.
    Hilkhuysen G; Gaubitch N; Brookes M; Huckvale M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):439-50. PubMed ID: 24437784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Conversational quality evaluation of artificial bandwidth extension of telephone speech.
    Pulakka H; Laaksonen L; Yrttiaho S; Myllylä V; Alku P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):848-61. PubMed ID: 22894208
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effects of age on speech and voice quality ratings.
    Goy H; Kathleen Pichora-Fuller M; van Lieshout P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Apr; 139(4):1648. PubMed ID: 27106312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of noise, reverberation and foreign accent on native and non-native listeners' performance of English speech comprehension.
    Peng ZE; Wang LM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 May; 139(5):2772. PubMed ID: 27250170
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Assessing the perceptual contributions of vowels and consonants to Mandarin sentence intelligibility.
    Chen F; Wong LL; Wong EY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Aug; 134(2):EL178-84. PubMed ID: 23927222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Is clear speech tailored to counter the effect of specific adverse listening conditions?
    Hazan V; Grynpas J; Baker R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Nov; 132(5):EL371-7. PubMed ID: 23145697
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 23.