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 *

310 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23742377)

  • 1. Predicting the effect of hearing loss and audibility on amplified speech reception in a multi-talker listening scenario.
    Woods WS; Kalluri S; Pentony S; Nooraei N
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jun; 133(6):4268-78. PubMed ID: 23742377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effects of attention on the speech reception threshold and pupil response of people with impaired and normal hearing.
    Koelewijn T; Versfeld NJ; Kramer SE
    Hear Res; 2017 Oct; 354():56-63. PubMed ID: 28869841
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Can basic auditory and cognitive measures predict hearing-impaired listeners' localization and spatial speech recognition abilities?
    Neher T; Laugesen S; Jensen NS; Kragelund L
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1542-58. PubMed ID: 21895093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Children's speech recognition scores: the Speech Intelligibility Index and proficiency factors for age and hearing level.
    Scollie SD
    Ear Hear; 2008 Aug; 29(4):543-56. PubMed ID: 18469717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The influence of informational masking on speech perception and pupil response in adults with hearing impairment.
    Koelewijn T; Zekveld AA; Festen JM; Kramer SE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1596-606. PubMed ID: 24606294
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Word recognition for temporally and spectrally distorted materials: the effects of age and hearing loss.
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller MK; Wilson RH; Macdonald EN
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(3):349-66. PubMed ID: 22343546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Bernstein JG; Grant KW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 May; 125(5):3358-72. PubMed ID: 19425676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cognitive abilities relate to self-reported hearing disability.
    Zekveld AA; George EL; Houtgast T; Kramer SE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2013 Oct; 56(5):1364-72. PubMed ID: 23838985
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Cognitive load during speech perception in noise: the influence of age, hearing loss, and cognition on the pupil response.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Festen JM
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(4):498-510. PubMed ID: 21233711
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of companding on speech recognition in quiet and noise for listeners with ANSD.
    Narne VK; Barman A; Deepthi M
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Feb; 53(2):94-100. PubMed ID: 24237041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Relationship between masking release in fluctuating maskers and speech reception thresholds in stationary noise.
    Christiansen C; Dau T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1655-66. PubMed ID: 22978894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effect of training on word-recognition performance in noise for young normal-hearing and older hearing-impaired listeners.
    Burk MH; Humes LE; Amos NE; Strauser LE
    Ear Hear; 2006 Jun; 27(3):263-78. PubMed ID: 16672795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 in multi-talker babble: a preliminary report.
    Wilson RH; Strouse A
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 2002; 39(1):105-13. PubMed ID: 11926322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Age-related changes in listening effort for various types of masker noises.
    Desjardins JL; Doherty KA
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):261-72. PubMed ID: 23095723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of slow-acting wide dynamic range compression on measures of intelligibility and ratings of speech quality in simulated-loss listeners.
    Rosengard PS; Payton KL; Braida LD
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Jun; 48(3):702-14. PubMed ID: 16197282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Modeling speech intelligibility in quiet and noise in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Rhebergen KS; Lyzenga J; Dreschler WA; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Mar; 127(3):1570-83. PubMed ID: 20329857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A model for the speech-reception threshold in noise without and with a hearing aid.
    Plomp R; Duquesnoy AJ
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1982; 15():95-111. PubMed ID: 6955931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Relations between frequency selectivity, temporal fine-structure processing, and speech reception in impaired hearing.
    Strelcyk O; Dau T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 May; 125(5):3328-45. PubMed ID: 19425674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing-aid users.
    Ng EH; Rudner M; Lunner T; Pedersen MS; Rönnberg J
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Jul; 52(7):433-41. PubMed ID: 23550584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The combined effects of reverberation and nonstationary noise on sentence intelligibility.
    George EL; Festen JM; Houtgast T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Aug; 124(2):1269-77. PubMed ID: 18681613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 16.