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 *

165 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25920851)

  • 21. Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants.
    Friesen LM; Shannon RV; Baskent D; Wang X
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Aug; 110(2):1150-63. PubMed ID: 11519582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S).
    Cameron S; Dillon H
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):196-211. PubMed ID: 17496671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Some Neurocognitive Correlates of Noise-Vocoded Speech Perception in Children With Normal Hearing: A Replication and Extension of ).
    Roman AS; Pisoni DB; Kronenberger WG; Faulkner KF
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(3):344-356. PubMed ID: 28045787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. Children's speech recognition in noise using omni-directional and dual-microphone hearing aid technology.
    Gravel JS; Fausel N; Liskow C; Chobot J
    Ear Hear; 1999 Feb; 20(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 10037061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Spatial Release From Masking in Children: Effects of Simulated Unilateral Hearing Loss.
    Corbin NE; Buss E; Leibold LJ
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(2):223-235. PubMed ID: 27787392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Effects of digital noise reduction on speech perception for children with hearing loss.
    Stelmachowicz P; Lewis D; Hoover B; Nishi K; McCreery R; Woods W
    Ear Hear; 2010 Jun; 31(3):345-55. PubMed ID: 20081536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Effects of Simulated Hearing Loss on Bilingual Children's Consonant Recognition in Noise.
    Nishi K; Trevino AC; Rosado Rogers L; García P; Neely ST
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(5):e292-e304. PubMed ID: 28353522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Hearing threshold levels and speech recognition in noise in 7-year-olds.
    Blandy S; Lutman M
    Int J Audiol; 2005 Aug; 44(8):435-43. PubMed ID: 16149238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. A speech enhancement scheme incorporating spectral expansion evaluated with simulated loss of frequency selectivity.
    Lyzenga J; Festen JM; Houtgast T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Sep; 112(3 Pt 1):1145-57. PubMed ID: 12243161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Spondee recognition in a two-talker masker and a speech-shaped noise masker in adults and children.
    Hall JW; Grose JH; Buss E; Dev MB
    Ear Hear; 2002 Apr; 23(2):159-65. PubMed ID: 11951851
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Effects of spectral smearing and temporal fine-structure distortion on the fluctuating-masker benefit for speech at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio.
    Bernstein JG; Brungart DS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jul; 130(1):473-88. PubMed ID: 21786913
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Olivocochlear Efferent Activity Is Associated With the Slope of the Psychometric Function of Speech Recognition in Noise.
    Mertes IB; Wilbanks EC; Leek MR
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(3):583-593. PubMed ID: 29135685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effects of reverberation on speech recognition in stationary and modulated noise by school-aged children and young adults.
    Wróblewski M; Lewis DE; Valente DL; Stelmachowicz PG
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(6):731-44. PubMed ID: 22732772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Development and evaluation of the Turkish matrix sentence test.
    Zokoll MA; Fidan D; Türkyılmaz D; Hochmuth S; Ergenç İ; Sennaroğlu G; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():51-61. PubMed ID: 26443486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The effects of energetic and informational masking on The Words-in-Noise Test (WIN).
    Wilson RH; Trivette CP; Williams DA; Watts KL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012; 23(7):522-33. PubMed ID: 22992259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Are the perceptual effects of spectral smearing influenced by speaker gender?
    Kishon-Rabin L; Patael S; Menahemi M; Amir N
    J Basic Clin Physiol Pharmacol; 2004; 15(1-2):41-55. PubMed ID: 15485129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. List equivalency of the AzBio sentence test in noise for listeners with normal-hearing sensitivity or cochlear implants.
    Schafer EC; Pogue J; Milrany T
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012; 23(7):501-9. PubMed ID: 22992257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Development of Open-Set Word Recognition in Children: Speech-Shaped Noise and Two-Talker Speech Maskers.
    Corbin NE; Bonino AY; Buss E; Leibold LJ
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(1):55-63. PubMed ID: 26226605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Masking of speech in young and elderly listeners with hearing loss.
    Souza PE; Turner CW
    J Speech Hear Res; 1994 Jun; 37(3):655-61. PubMed ID: 8084195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.