159 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24270967)
1. [On the effect of reverberation on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners].
Mühler R; Ziese M; Rostalski D; Verhey JL
HNO; 2014 Jan; 62(1):35-40. PubMed ID: 24270967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The combined effects of reverberation and noise on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners.
Hazrati O; Loizou PC
Int J Audiol; 2012 Jun; 51(6):437-43. PubMed ID: 22356300
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effects of early and late reflections on intelligibility of reverberated speech by cochlear implant listeners.
Hu Y; Kokkinakis K
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):EL22-8. PubMed ID: 24437852
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Simultaneous suppression of noise and reverberation in cochlear implants using a ratio masking strategy.
Hazrati O; Sadjadi SO; Loizou PC; Hansen JH
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Nov; 134(5):3759-65. PubMed ID: 24180786
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Masking release with changing fundamental frequency: Electric acoustic stimulation resembles normal hearing subjects.
Auinger AB; Riss D; Liepins R; Rader T; Keck T; Keintzel T; Kaider A; Baumgartner WD; Gstoettner W; Arnoldner C
Hear Res; 2017 Jul; 350():226-234. PubMed ID: 28527538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Two-microphone spatial filtering improves speech reception for cochlear-implant users in reverberant conditions with multiple noise sources.
Goldsworthy RL
Trends Hear; 2014 Oct; 18():. PubMed ID: 25330772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impact of room acoustic parameters on speech and music perception among participants with cochlear implants.
Eurich B; Klenzner T; Oehler M
Hear Res; 2019 Jun; 377():122-132. PubMed ID: 30933704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The effect of fluctuating maskers on speech understanding of high-performing cochlear implant users.
Zirn S; Polterauer D; Keller S; Hemmert W
Int J Audiol; 2016; 55(5):295-304. PubMed ID: 26865377
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Do you hear the noise? The German matrix sentence test with a fixed noise level in subjects with normal hearing and hearing impairment.
Wardenga N; Batsoulis C; Wagener KC; Brand T; Lenarz T; Maier H
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():71-9. PubMed ID: 26555195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A physiologically-inspired model reproducing the speech intelligibility benefit in cochlear implant listeners with residual acoustic hearing.
Zamaninezhad L; Hohmann V; Büchner A; Schädler MR; Jürgens T
Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():50-61. PubMed ID: 27838372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Investigation of a matrix sentence test in noise: reproducibility and discrimination function in cochlear implant patients.
Hey M; Hocke T; Hedderich J; Müller-Deile J
Int J Audiol; 2014 Dec; 53(12):895-902. PubMed ID: 25140602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Evaluation of adaptive dynamic range optimization in adverse listening conditions for cochlear implants.
Ali H; Hazrati O; Tobey EA; Hansen JH
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Sep; 136(3):EL242. PubMed ID: 25190428
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparing the effects of reverberation and of noise on speech recognition in simulated electric-acoustic listening.
Helms Tillery K; Brown CA; Bacon SP
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Jan; 131(1):416-23. PubMed ID: 22280603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Interleaved Acoustic Environments: Impact of an Auditory Scene Classification Procedure on Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users.
Eichenauer A; Baumann U; Stöver T; Weissgerber T
Trends Hear; 2021; 25():23312165211014118. PubMed ID: 34028332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Binaural Speech Understanding With Bilateral Cochlear Implants in Reverberation.
Kokkinakis K
Am J Audiol; 2018 Mar; 27(1):85-94. PubMed ID: 29279894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Understanding the effect of noise on electrical stimulation sequences in cochlear implants and its impact on speech intelligibility.
Qazi OU; van Dijk B; Moonen M; Wouters J
Hear Res; 2013 May; 299():79-87. PubMed ID: 23396271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluation of a spectral subtraction strategy to suppress reverberant energy in cochlear implant devices.
Kokkinakis K; Runge C; Tahmina Q; Hu Y
J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jul; 138(1):115-24. PubMed ID: 26233012
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Spatial Release From Masking in Simulated Cochlear Implant Users With and Without Access to Low-Frequency Acoustic Hearing.
Williges B; Dietz M; Hohmann V; Jürgens T
Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Improving speech perception in noise for children with cochlear implants.
Gifford RH; Olund AP; DeJong M
J Am Acad Audiol; 2011 Oct; 22(9):623-632. PubMed ID: 22192607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
