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 *

174 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25669298)

  • 1. Effect of temporal modulation rate on the intelligibility of phase-based speech.
    Chen F; Guan T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Dec; 134(6):EL520. PubMed ID: 25669298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. The effects of noise vocoding on speech quality perception.
    Anderson MC; Arehart KH; Kates JM
    Hear Res; 2014 Mar; 309():75-83. PubMed ID: 24333929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Role of short-time acoustic temporal fine structure cues in sentence recognition for normal-hearing listeners.
    Hou L; Xu L
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Feb; 143(2):EL127. PubMed ID: 29495716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Enhancement of speech intelligibility in reverberant rooms: role of amplitude envelope and temporal fine structure.
    Srinivasan NK; Zahorik P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jun; 135(6):EL239-45. PubMed ID: 24907828
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of periodic interruptions on the intelligibility of speech based on temporal fine-structure or envelope cues.
    Gilbert G; Bergeras I; Voillery D; Lorenzi C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Sep; 122(3):1336. PubMed ID: 17927396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Effects of low harmonics on tone identification in natural and vocoded speech.
    Liu C; Azimi B; Tahmina Q; Hu Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Nov; 132(5):EL378-84. PubMed ID: 23145698
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Spectral and temporal resolutions of information-bearing acoustic changes for understanding vocoded sentences.
    Stilp CE; Goupell MJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Feb; 137(2):844-55. PubMed ID: 25698018
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Frequency specificity of amplitude envelope patterns in noise-vocoded speech.
    Ueda K; Araki T; Nakajima Y
    Hear Res; 2018 Sep; 367():169-181. PubMed ID: 29929750
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of fluctuating maskers for speech recognition tests.
    Francart T; van Wieringen A; Wouters J
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):2-13. PubMed ID: 21091261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of lowpass and highpass filtering on the intelligibility of speech based on temporal fine structure or envelope cues.
    Ardoint M; Lorenzi C
    Hear Res; 2010 Feb; 260(1-2):89-95. PubMed ID: 19963053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Advantage of bimodal fitting in prosody perception for children using a cochlear implant and a hearing aid.
    Straatman LV; Rietveld AC; Beijen J; Mylanus EA; Mens LH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Oct; 128(4):1884-95. PubMed ID: 20968360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Effect of acoustic fine structure cues on the recognition of auditory-only and audiovisual speech.
    Meister H; Fuersen K; Schreitmueller S; Walger M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Jun; 139(6):3116. PubMed ID: 27369134
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Role and relative contribution of temporal envelope and fine structure cues in sentence recognition by normal-hearing listeners.
    Apoux F; Yoho SE; Youngdahl CL; Healy EW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Sep; 134(3):2205-12. PubMed ID: 23967950
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effects of the addition of low-level, low-noise noise on the intelligibility of sentences processed to remove temporal envelope information.
    Hopkins K; Moore BC; Stone MA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Oct; 128(4):2150-61. PubMed ID: 20968385
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Voice segregation by difference in fundamental frequency: effect of masker type.
    Deroche ML; Culling JF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Nov; 134(5):EL465-70. PubMed ID: 24181992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Melodic contour identification and sentence recognition using sung speech.
    Crew JD; Galvin JJ; Fu QJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Sep; 138(3):EL347-51. PubMed ID: 26428838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Phoneme recognition in vocoded maskers by normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners.
    Phatak SA; Grant KW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):859-66. PubMed ID: 25096119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Perceptual weighting of individual and concurrent cues for sentence intelligibility: frequency, envelope, and fine structure.
    Fogerty D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Feb; 129(2):977-88. PubMed ID: 21361454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.