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 *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24560785)

  • 1. Evaluation of speech intelligibility in short-reverberant sound fields.
    Shimokura R; Matsui T; Takaki Y; Nishimura T; Yamanaka T; Hosoi H
    Auris Nasus Larynx; 2014 Aug; 41(4):343-9. PubMed ID: 24560785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Intelligibility and Clarity of Reverberant Speech: Effects of Wide Dynamic Range Compression Release Time and Working Memory.
    Reinhart PN; Souza PE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2016 Dec; 59(6):1543-1554. PubMed ID: 27997667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of type of early reflection, clarity of speech, reverberation and diffuse noise on the spatial perception of a speech source and its intelligibility.
    Prodi N; Pellegatti M; Visentin C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2022 May; 151(5):3522. PubMed ID: 35649908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. The influence of audiovisual ceiling performance on the relationship between reverberation and directional benefit: perception and prediction.
    Wu YH; Bentler RA
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(5):604-14. PubMed ID: 22677815
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Acceptable range of speech level for both young and aged listeners in reverberant and quiet sound fields.
    Sato H; Sato H; Morimoto M; Ota R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Sep; 122(3):1616. PubMed ID: 17927421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Elderly listeners with low intelligibility scores under reverberation show degraded subcortical representation of reverberant speech.
    Fujihira H; Shiraishi K; Remijn GB
    Neurosci Lett; 2017 Jan; 637():102-107. PubMed ID: 27884735
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Intelligibility of reverberant noisy speech with ideal binary masking.
    Roman N; Woodruff J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Oct; 130(4):2153-61. PubMed ID: 21973369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Subjective and objective effects of fast and slow compression on the perception of reverberant speech in listeners with hearing loss.
    Shi LF; Doherty KA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2008 Oct; 51(5):1328-40. PubMed ID: 18664685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Measuring and modeling speech intelligibility in real and loudspeaker-based virtual sound environments.
    Ahrens A; Marschall M; Dau T
    Hear Res; 2019 Jun; 377():307-317. PubMed ID: 30867112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Evaluating airborne sound insulation in terms of speech intelligibility.
    Park HK; Bradley JS; Gover BN
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Mar; 123(3):1458-71. PubMed ID: 18345835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Speech intelligibility in reverberation with ideal binary masking: effects of early reflections and signal-to-noise ratio threshold.
    Roman N; Woodruff J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1707-17. PubMed ID: 23464040
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Intelligibility of bone-conducted ultrasonic speech.
    Okamoto Y; Nakagawa S; Fujimoto K; Tonoike M
    Hear Res; 2005 Oct; 208(1-2):107-13. PubMed ID: 16019175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Perceptual consequences of changes in vocoded speech parameters in various reverberation conditions.
    Drgas S; Blaszak MA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2009 Aug; 52(4):945-55. PubMed ID: 19380609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Influence of tinnitus sound therapy signals on the intelligibility of speech.
    Paglialonga A; Fiocchi S; Parazzini M; Ravazzani P; Tognola G
    J Laryngol Otol; 2011 Aug; 125(8):795-801. PubMed ID: 21729434
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Prediction of the influence of reverberation on binaural speech intelligibility in noise and in quiet.
    Rennies J; Brand T; Kollmeier B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Nov; 130(5):2999-3012. PubMed ID: 22087928
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Objective performance analysis of spherical microphone arrays for speech enhancement in rooms.
    Peled Y; Rafaely B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1473-81. PubMed ID: 22978876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of room acoustics on the intelligibility of speech in classrooms for young children.
    Yang W; Bradley JS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Feb; 125(2):922-33. PubMed ID: 19206869
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech intelligibility differences across sound classes with in-the-ear and free-field microphones in quiet.
    Estis JM; Parisi JA; Moore RE; Brungart DS
    Percept Mot Skills; 2011 Jun; 112(3):845-59. PubMed ID: 21853774
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Amplitude-modulation detection by gerbils in reverberant sound fields.
    Lingner A; Kugler K; Grothe B; Wiegrebe L
    Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 302():107-12. PubMed ID: 23603513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A comparative intelligibility study of single-microphone noise reduction algorithms.
    Hu Y; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Sep; 122(3):1777. PubMed ID: 17927437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.