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 *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26233012)

  • 1. 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]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. A channel-selection criterion for suppressing reverberation in cochlear implants.
    Kokkinakis K; Hazrati O; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 May; 129(5):3221-32. PubMed ID: 21568424
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. Reverberation suppression in cochlear implants using a blind channel-selection strategy.
    Hazrati O; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jun; 133(6):4188-96. PubMed ID: 23742370
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Parameter tuning of time-frequency masking algorithms for reverberant artifact removal within the cochlear implant stimulus.
    Shahidi LK; Collins LM; Mainsah BO
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2022 Nov; 23(6):309-316. PubMed ID: 35875863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Blind binary masking for reverberation suppression in cochlear implants.
    Hazrati O; Lee J; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1607-14. PubMed ID: 23464030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [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]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Effects of source-to-listener distance and masking on perception of cochlear implant processed speech in reverberant rooms.
    Whitmal NA; Poissant SF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Nov; 126(5):2556-69. PubMed ID: 19894835
    [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. Prior exposure to a reverberant listening environment improves speech intelligibility in adult cochlear implant listeners.
    Srinivasan NK; Tobey EA; Loizou PC
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2016; 17(2):98-104. PubMed ID: 26843090
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The effects of reverberant self- and overlap-masking on speech recognition in cochlear implant listeners.
    Desmond JM; Collins LM; Throckmorton CS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jun; 135(6):EL304-10. PubMed ID: 24907838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Effect of the division between early and late reflections on intelligibility of ideal binary-masked speech.
    Li J; Xia R; Fang Q; Li A; Pan J; Yan Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 May; 137(5):2801-10. PubMed ID: 25994708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The influence of spectral characteristics of early reflections on speech intelligibility.
    Arweiler I; Buchholz JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Aug; 130(2):996-1005. PubMed ID: 21877812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Interactions Between Digital Noise Reduction and Reverberation: Acoustic and Behavioral Effects.
    Reinhart P; Zahorik P; Souza P
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2020 Jan; 31(1):17-29. PubMed ID: 31267958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. A deep learning based segregation algorithm to increase speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in reverberant-noisy conditions.
    Zhao Y; Wang D; Johnson EM; Healy EW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Sep; 144(3):1627. PubMed ID: 30424625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.