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 *

132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26737556)

  • 1. Objective measures of perceptual quality for predicting speech intelligibility in sensorineural hearing loss.
    Chiaramello E; Moriconi S; Tognola G
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2015 Aug; 2015():5577-80. PubMed ID: 26737556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Speech quality evaluation of a sparse coding shrinkage noise reduction algorithm with normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners.
    Sang J; Hu H; Zheng C; Li G; Lutman ME; Bleeck S
    Hear Res; 2015 Sep; 327():175-85. PubMed ID: 26232529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Acoustic simulation of cochlear implant hearing: Effect of manipulating various acoustic parameters on intelligibility of speech.
    Jain S; Vipin Ghosh PG
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2018 Jan; 19(1):46-53. PubMed ID: 29032744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effect of slow-acting wide dynamic range compression on measures of intelligibility and ratings of speech quality in simulated-loss listeners.
    Rosengard PS; Payton KL; Braida LD
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Jun; 48(3):702-14. PubMed ID: 16197282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A comparison of gain for adults from generic hearing aid prescriptive methods: impacts on predicted loudness, frequency bandwidth, and speech intelligibility.
    Johnson EE; Dillon H
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2011; 22(7):441-59. PubMed ID: 21993050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Smartphone-based real-time speech enhancement for improving hearing aids speech perception.
    Yu Rao ; Yiya Hao ; Panahi IM; Kehtarnavaz N
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2016 Aug; 2016():5885-5888. PubMed ID: 28269593
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. An overview of the HASPI and HASQI metrics for predicting speech intelligibility and speech quality for normal hearing, hearing loss, and hearing aids.
    Kates JM; Arehart KH
    Hear Res; 2022 Dec; 426():108608. PubMed ID: 36137862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. A comparison of speech intelligibility and subjective quality with hearing-aid processing in older adults with hearing loss.
    Arehart KH; Chon SH; Lundberg EMH; Harvey LO; Kates JM; Anderson MC; Rallapalli VH; Souza PE
    Int J Audiol; 2022 Jan; 61(1):46-58. PubMed ID: 33913795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effects of multi-channel compression time constants on subjectively perceived sound quality and speech intelligibility.
    Hansen M
    Ear Hear; 2002 Aug; 23(4):369-80. PubMed ID: 12195179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A comparison of threshold-based fitting strategies for nonlinear hearing aids.
    Stelmachowicz PG; Dalzell S; Peterson D; Kopun J; Lewis DL; Hoover BE
    Ear Hear; 1998 Apr; 19(2):131-8. PubMed ID: 9562535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Acoustic and perceptual effects of magnifying interaural difference cues in a simulated "binaural" hearing aid.
    de Taillez T; Grimm G; Kollmeier B; Neher T
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun; 57(sup3):S81-S91. PubMed ID: 28395561
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of an articulation-index based model for predicting the effects of adaptive frequency response hearing aids.
    Fabry DA; Van Tasell DJ
    J Speech Hear Res; 1990 Dec; 33(4):676-89. PubMed ID: 2273883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of objective and subjective measures of speech intelligibility in elderly hearing-impaired listeners.
    Cox RM; Alexander GC; Rivera IM
    J Speech Hear Res; 1991 Aug; 34(4):904-15. PubMed ID: 1956197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Intelligibility of conversational and clear speech in noise and reverberation for listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Payton KL; Uchanski RM; Braida LD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1994 Mar; 95(3):1581-92. PubMed ID: 8176061
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The effects of multichannel compression/expansion amplification on the intelligibility of nonsense syllables in noise.
    Walker G; Byrne D; Dillon H
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1984 Sep; 76(3):746-57. PubMed ID: 6491047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Reference-Free Assessment of Speech Intelligibility Using Bispectrum of an Auditory Neurogram.
    Hossain ME; Jassim WA; Zilany MS
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(3):e0150415. PubMed ID: 26967160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The Effects of Manufacturer's Prefit and Real-Ear Fitting on the Predicted Speech Perception of Children with Severe to Profound Hearing Loss.
    Quar TK; Umat C; Chew YY
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 May; 30(5):346-356. PubMed ID: 30461383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech intelligibility considerations in specifying characteristics of a programmable hearing aid.
    Pavlovic CV
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():181-9. PubMed ID: 2356725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Audiovisual asynchrony detection and speech intelligibility in noise with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing impairment.
    Başkent D; Bazo D
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(5):582-92. PubMed ID: 21389856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Relationship Among Signal Fidelity, Hearing Loss, and Working Memory for Digital Noise Suppression.
    Arehart K; Souza P; Kates J; Lunner T; Pedersen MS
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(5):505-16. PubMed ID: 25985016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.