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 *

325 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28464686)

  • 21. Spectral contrast enhancement improves speech intelligibility in noise for cochlear implants.
    Nogueira W; Rode T; Büchner A
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Feb; 139(2):728-39. PubMed ID: 26936556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Comparison of two channel selection criteria for noise suppression in cochlear implants.
    Hazrati O; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1615-24. PubMed ID: 23464031
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Acoustic Analysis of Persian Vowels in Cochlear Implant Users: A Comparison With Hearing-impaired Children Using Hearing Aid and Normal-hearing Children.
    Jafari N; Yadegari F; Jalaie S
    J Voice; 2016 Nov; 30(6):763.e1-763.e7. PubMed ID: 26725549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Fundamental frequency is critical to speech perception in noise in combined acoustic and electric hearing.
    Carroll J; Tiaden S; Zeng FG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Oct; 130(4):2054-62. PubMed ID: 21973360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Speech perception in simulated electric hearing exploits information-bearing acoustic change.
    Stilp CE; Goupell MJ; Kluender KR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Feb; 133(2):EL136-41. PubMed ID: 23363194
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss.
    Fogerty D; Ahlstrom JB; Bologna WJ; Dubno JR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jun; 137(6):3487-501. PubMed ID: 26093436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A Cepstral Peak Prominence (CPP) Voice Analysis in Iranian Post-lingual Deaf Adult Cochlear Implant Users.
    Aghaei F; Khoramshahi H; Zamani P; Dehqan A; Hesam S
    J Voice; 2024 May; 38(3):795.e11-795.e20. PubMed ID: 34857450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Voice gender differences and separation of simultaneous talkers in cochlear implant users with residual hearing.
    Visram AS; Kluk K; McKay CM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):EL135-41. PubMed ID: 22894312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Large-scale training to increase speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in novel noises.
    Chen J; Wang Y; Yoho SE; Wang D; Healy EW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 May; 139(5):2604. PubMed ID: 27250154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Speech perception of sine-wave signals by children with cochlear implants.
    Nittrouer S; Kuess J; Lowenstein JH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 May; 137(5):2811-22. PubMed ID: 25994709
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Lexical tone recognition in noise in normal-hearing children and prelingually deafened children with cochlear implants.
    Mao Y; Xu L
    Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup2):S23-S30. PubMed ID: 27564095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Adjustments of the amplitude mapping function: Sensitivity of cochlear implant users and effects on subjective preference and speech recognition.
    Theelen-van den Hoek FL; Boymans M; van Dijk B; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2016 Nov; 55(11):674-87. PubMed ID: 27447758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The effect of a coding strategy that removes temporally masked pulses on speech perception by cochlear implant users.
    Lamping W; Goehring T; Marozeau J; Carlyon RP
    Hear Res; 2020 Jun; 391():107969. PubMed ID: 32320925
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Spectro-temporal cues enhance modulation sensitivity in cochlear implant users.
    Zheng Y; Escabí M; Litovsky RY
    Hear Res; 2017 Aug; 351():45-54. PubMed ID: 28601530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Optimising the effect of noise reduction algorithm ClearVoice in cochlear implant users by increasing the maximum comfort levels.
    Dingemanse JG; Goedegebure A
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Mar; 57(3):230-235. PubMed ID: 29065731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The combined effects of reverberation and noise on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners.
    Hazrati O; Loizou PC
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Jun; 51(6):437-43. PubMed ID: 22356300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Period for Normalization of Voice Acoustic Parameters in Indian Pediatric Cochlear Implantees.
    Joy JV; Deshpande S; Vaid DN
    J Voice; 2017 May; 31(3):391.e19-391.e25. PubMed ID: 28029557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. The role of continuous low-frequency harmonicity cues for interrupted speech perception in bimodal hearing.
    Oh SH; Donaldson GS; Kong YY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Apr; 139(4):1747. PubMed ID: 27106322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Development and validation of the Leuven intelligibility sentence test with male speaker (LIST-m).
    Jansen S; Koning R; Wouters J; van Wieringen A
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Jan; 53(1):55-9. PubMed ID: 24152309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The impact of reverberant self-masking and overlap-masking effects on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners (L).
    Kokkinakis K; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1099-102. PubMed ID: 21895052
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 17.