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 *

510 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26383042)

  • 41. The potential of onset enhancement for increased speech intelligibility in auditory prostheses.
    Koning R; Wouters J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Oct; 132(4):2569-81. PubMed ID: 23039450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Development and evaluation of a linguistically and audiologically controlled sentence intelligibility test.
    Uslar VN; Carroll R; Hanke M; Hamann C; Ruigendijk E; Brand T; Kollmeier B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct; 134(4):3039-56. PubMed ID: 24116439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Pupil response as an indication of effortful listening: the influence of sentence intelligibility.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Festen JM
    Ear Hear; 2010 Aug; 31(4):480-90. PubMed ID: 20588118
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. 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]  

  • 45. 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]  

  • 46. Improving word recognition in noise among hearing-impaired subjects with a single-channel cochlear noise-reduction algorithm.
    Fink N; Furst M; Muchnik C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1718-31. PubMed ID: 22978899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. The effect of speech modification on non-native listeners for matrix-style sentences.
    Cooke M; García Lecumberri ML; Tang Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Feb; 137(2):EL151-7. PubMed ID: 25698043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Understanding the effect of noise on electrical stimulation sequences in cochlear implants and its impact on speech intelligibility.
    Qazi OU; van Dijk B; Moonen M; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2013 May; 299():79-87. PubMed ID: 23396271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Modeling speech intelligibility in quiet and noise in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Rhebergen KS; Lyzenga J; Dreschler WA; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Mar; 127(3):1570-83. PubMed ID: 20329857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Speech Perception With Combined Electric-Acoustic Stimulation: A Simulation and Model Comparison.
    Rader T; Adel Y; Fastl H; Baumann U
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(6):e314-25. PubMed ID: 25989069
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Prediction of speech intelligibility in spatial noise and reverberation for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Beutelmann R; Brand T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Jul; 120(1):331-42. PubMed ID: 16875230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. New measures of masked text recognition in relation to speech-in-noise perception and their associations with age and cognitive abilities.
    Besser J; Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Rönnberg J; Festen JM
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2012 Feb; 55(1):194-209. PubMed ID: 22199191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Evaluation of an internet-based speech-in-noise screening test for school-age children.
    Sheikh Rashid M; Dreschler WA; de Laat JAPM
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Dec; 56(12):967-975. PubMed ID: 28936876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Evidence-based occupational hearing screening II: validation of a screening methodology using measures of functional hearing ability.
    Soli SD; Amano-Kusumoto A; Clavier O; Wilbur J; Casto K; Freed D; Laroche C; Vaillancourt V; Giguère C; Dreschler WA; Rhebergen KS
    Int J Audiol; 2018 May; 57(5):323-334. PubMed ID: 29668374
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Investigation of a matrix sentence test in noise: reproducibility and discrimination function in cochlear implant patients.
    Hey M; Hocke T; Hedderich J; Müller-Deile J
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Dec; 53(12):895-902. PubMed ID: 25140602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Development and validation of a smartphone-based digits-in-noise hearing test in South African English.
    Potgieter JM; Swanepoel de W; Myburgh HC; Hopper TC; Smits C
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Jul; 55(7):405-11. PubMed ID: 27121117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. The effects of working memory capacity and semantic cues on the intelligibility of speech in noise.
    Zekveld AA; Rudner M; Johnsrude IS; Rönnberg J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Sep; 134(3):2225-34. PubMed ID: 23967952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Development and evaluation of the Cantonese matrix sentence test.
    Hu H; Hochmuth S; Man CK; Warzybok A; Kollmeier B; Wong LLN
    Int J Audiol; 2024 Jan; 63(1):8-20. PubMed ID: 36441177
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. The Sharvard Corpus: a phonemically-balanced Spanish sentence resource for audiology.
    Aubanel V; Lecumberri ML; Cooke M
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Sep; 53(9):633-8. PubMed ID: 24863133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Speech-in-noise screening tests by internet, part 1: test evaluation for noise-induced hearing loss identification.
    Leensen MC; de Laat JA; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Nov; 50(11):823-34. PubMed ID: 21988504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 26.