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 *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27697129)

  • 1. Auditory profiling and hearing-aid satisfaction in hearing-aid candidates.
    Thorup N; Santurette S; Jørgensen S; Kjærbøl E; Dau T; Friis M
    Dan Med J; 2016 Oct; 63(10):. PubMed ID: 27697129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Auditory models of suprathreshold distortion and speech intelligibility in persons with impaired hearing.
    Bernstein JG; Summers V; Grassi E; Grant KW
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Apr; 24(4):307-28. PubMed ID: 23636211
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Comparing Binaural Pre-processing Strategies III: Speech Intelligibility of Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Listeners.
    Völker C; Warzybok A; Ernst SM
    Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of the sparse coding shrinkage noise reduction algorithm in normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners.
    Sang J; Hu H; Zheng C; Li G; Lutman ME; Bleeck S
    Hear Res; 2014 Apr; 310():36-47. PubMed ID: 24495441
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Bernstein JG; Grant KW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 May; 125(5):3358-72. PubMed ID: 19425676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Predicting speech intelligibility in hearing-impaired listeners using a physiologically inspired auditory model.
    Zaar J; Carney LH
    Hear Res; 2022 Dec; 426():108553. PubMed ID: 35750575
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Relations between perceptual measures of temporal processing, auditory-evoked brainstem responses and speech intelligibility in noise.
    Papakonstantinou A; Strelcyk O; Dau T
    Hear Res; 2011 Oct; 280(1-2):30-7. PubMed ID: 21354285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Listening through hearing aids affects spatial perception and speech intelligibility in normal-hearing listeners.
    Cubick J; Buchholz JM; Best V; Lavandier M; Dau T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Nov; 144(5):2896. PubMed ID: 30522291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Better-ear glimpsing at low frequencies in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Rana B; Buchholz JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Aug; 140(2):1192. PubMed ID: 27586748
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The fluctuating masker benefit for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners with equal audibility at a fixed signal-to-noise ratio.
    Jensen KK; Bernstein JGW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2019 Apr; 145(4):2113. PubMed ID: 31046298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Relations Between the Intelligibility of Speech in Noise and Psychophysical Measures of Hearing Measured in Four Languages Using the Auditory Profile Test Battery.
    Van Esch TE; Dreschler WA
    Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26647417
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Speech recognition in fluctuating and continuous maskers: effects of hearing loss and presentation level.
    Summers V; Molis MR
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2004 Apr; 47(2):245-56. PubMed ID: 15157127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Perceptual effects of noise reduction with respect to personal preference, speech intelligibility, and listening effort.
    Brons I; Houben R; Dreschler WA
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 22874643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Intelligibility of speech in noise at high presentation levels: effects of hearing loss and frequency region.
    Summers V; Cord MT
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Aug; 122(2):1130-7. PubMed ID: 17672659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Predictors of Hearing-Aid Outcomes.
    Lopez-Poveda EA; Johannesen PT; Pérez-González P; Blanco JL; Kalluri S; Edwards B
    Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517730526. PubMed ID: 28929903
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. 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]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Speech intelligibility in background noise with ideal binary time-frequency masking.
    Wang D; Kjems U; Pedersen MS; Boldt JB; Lunner T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Apr; 125(4):2336-47. PubMed ID: 19354408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The effects of hearing impairment and aging on spatial processing.
    Glyde H; Cameron S; Dillon H; Hickson L; Seeto M
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(1):15-28. PubMed ID: 22941406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Speech Masking in Normal and Impaired Hearing: Interactions Between Frequency Selectivity and Inherent Temporal Fluctuations in Noise.
    Oxenham AJ; Kreft HA
    Adv Exp Med Biol; 2016; 894():125-132. PubMed ID: 27080653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.