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 *

139 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24907822)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. Glimpsing speech in temporally and spectro-temporally modulated noise.
    Fogerty D; Carter BL; Healy EW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 May; 143(5):3047. PubMed ID: 29857753
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The effect of audiovisual and binaural listening on the acceptable noise level (ANL): establishing an ANL conceptual model.
    Wu YH; Stangl E; Pang C; Zhang X
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2014 Feb; 25(2):141-53. PubMed ID: 24828215
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Effect of fundamental-frequency and sentence-onset differences on speech-identification performance of young and older adults in a competing-talker background.
    Lee JH; Humes LE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1700-17. PubMed ID: 22978898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Effects of linear and nonlinear speech rate changes on speech intelligibility in stationary and fluctuating maskers.
    Cooke M; Aubanel V
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jun; 141(6):4126. PubMed ID: 28618803
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. Individual differences in speech-in-noise perception parallel neural speech processing and attention in preschoolers.
    Thompson EC; Woodruff Carr K; White-Schwoch T; Otto-Meyer S; Kraus N
    Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():148-157. PubMed ID: 27864051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Suprathreshold auditory processing and speech perception in noise: hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners.
    Summers V; Makashay MJ; Theodoroff SM; Leek MR
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Apr; 24(4):274-92. PubMed ID: 23636209
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Psychometric functions for sentence recognition in sinusoidally amplitude-modulated noises.
    Shen Y; Manzano NK; Richards VM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Dec; 138(6):3613-24. PubMed ID: 26723318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. Speech-in-noise screening tests by internet, part 2: improving test sensitivity for noise-induced hearing loss.
    Leensen MC; de Laat JA; Snik AF; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Nov; 50(11):835-48. PubMed ID: 21970351
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Contribution of consonant landmarks to speech recognition in simulated acoustic-electric hearing.
    Chen F; Loizou PC
    Ear Hear; 2010 Apr; 31(2):259-67. PubMed ID: 20081538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The relative importance of consonant and vowel segments to the recognition of words and sentences: effects of age and hearing loss.
    Fogerty D; Kewley-Port D; Humes LE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1667-78. PubMed ID: 22978895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effect of masker modulation depth on speech masking release.
    Gnansia D; Jourdes V; Lorenzi C
    Hear Res; 2008 May; 239(1-2):60-8. PubMed ID: 18434049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Laboratory evaluation of an optimised internet-based speech-in-noise test for occupational high-frequency hearing loss screening: Occupational Earcheck.
    Sheikh Rashid M; Leensen MCJ; de Laat JAPM; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Nov; 56(11):844-853. PubMed ID: 28587489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Evaluation of phoneme compression schemes designed to compensate for temporal and spectral masking in background noise.
    Goedegebure A; Goedegebure-Hulshof M; Dreschler WA; Verschuure J
    Int J Audiol; 2005 Nov; 44(11):647-55. PubMed ID: 16379493
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Spectro-temporal glimpsing of speech in noise: Regularity and coherence of masking patterns reduces uncertainty and increases intelligibility.
    Fogerty D; Sevich VA; Healy EW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 Sep; 148(3):1552. PubMed ID: 33003879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Masked speech perception across the adult lifespan: Impact of age and hearing impairment.
    Goossens T; Vercammen C; Wouters J; van Wieringen A
    Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():109-124. PubMed ID: 27845259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Reduced efficiency of audiovisual integration for nonnative speech.
    Yi HG; Phelps JE; Smiljanic R; Chandrasekaran B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Nov; 134(5):EL387-93. PubMed ID: 24181980
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The effect of better-ear glimpsing on spatial release from masking.
    Glyde H; Buchholz J; Dillon H; Best V; Hickson L; Cameron S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct; 134(4):2937-45. PubMed ID: 24116429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.