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 *

157 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28964090)

  • 21. The importance for speech intelligibility of random fluctuations in "steady" background noise.
    Stone MA; Füllgrabe C; Mackinnon RC; Moore BC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Nov; 130(5):2874-81. PubMed ID: 22087916
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Assessing the perceptual contributions of level-dependent segments to sentence intelligibility.
    Guan T; Chu GX; Tsao Y; Chen F
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Nov; 140(5):3745. PubMed ID: 27908047
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The Intelligibility of Interrupted Speech: Cochlear Implant Users and Normal Hearing Listeners.
    Bhargava P; Gaudrain E; Başkent D
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2016 Oct; 17(5):475-91. PubMed ID: 27090115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Information-bearing acoustic change outperforms duration in predicting intelligibility of full-spectrum and noise-vocoded sentences.
    Stilp CE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1518-29. PubMed ID: 24606287
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The effects of noise vocoding on speech quality perception.
    Anderson MC; Arehart KH; Kates JM
    Hear Res; 2014 Mar; 309():75-83. PubMed ID: 24333929
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Intelligibility of whispered speech in stationary and modulated noise maskers.
    Freyman RL; Griffin AM; Oxenham AJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Oct; 132(4):2514-23. PubMed ID: 23039445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Effect of temporal fine structure on speech intelligibility modeling.
    Chen F; Guan T; Wong LL
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2013; 2013():4199-202. PubMed ID: 24110658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Speech Understanding With Various Maskers in Cochlear-Implant and Simulated Cochlear-Implant Hearing: Effects of Spectral Resolution and Implications for Masking Release.
    Croghan NBH; Smith ZM
    Trends Hear; 2018; 22():2331216518787276. PubMed ID: 30022730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Effects of Additional Low-Pass-Filtered Speech on Listening Effort for Noise-Band-Vocoded Speech in Quiet and in Noise.
    Pals C; Sarampalis A; van Dijk M; Başkent D
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(1):3-17. PubMed ID: 29757801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Channel selection in the modulation domain for improved speech intelligibility in noise.
    Wójcicki KK; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Apr; 131(4):2904-13. PubMed ID: 22501068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Combination and Comparison of Sound Coding Strategies Using Cochlear Implant Simulation With Mandarin Speech.
    Huang EH; Wu CM; Lin HC
    IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng; 2021; 29():2407-2416. PubMed ID: 34767509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Effects of reverberation and masking on speech intelligibility in cochlear implant simulations.
    Poissant SF; Whitmal NA; Freyman RL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Mar; 119(3):1606-15. PubMed ID: 16583905
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Sine-wave and noise-vocoded sine-wave speech in a tone language: Acoustic details matter.
    Rosen S; Hui SN
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Dec; 138(6):3698-702. PubMed ID: 26723325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The relationship between talker acoustics, intelligibility, and effort in degraded listening conditions.
    Paulus M; Hazan V; Adank P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 May; 147(5):3348. PubMed ID: 32486777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The contribution of matched envelope dynamic range to the binaural benefits in simulated bilateral electric hearing.
    Chen F; Wong LL; Qiu J; Liu Y; Azimi B; Hu Y
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 56(4):1166-74. PubMed ID: 23926330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Benefit of high-rate envelope cues in vocoder processing: effect of number of channels and spectral region.
    Stone MA; Füllgrabe C; Moore BC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Oct; 124(4):2272-82. PubMed ID: 19062865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Studying the Effect of Carrier Type on the Perception of Vocoded Stimuli via Mismatch Negativity.
    Xu D; Zheng D; Chen F
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2019 Jul; 2019():3167-3170. PubMed ID: 31946560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. High-rate envelope information in many channels provides resistance to reduction of speech intelligibility produced by multi-channel fast-acting compression.
    Stone MA; Füllgrabe C; Moore BC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Nov; 126(5):2155-8. PubMed ID: 19894794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Listeners Experience Linguistic Masking Release in Noise-Vocoded Speech-in-Speech Recognition.
    Viswanathan N; Kokkinakis K; Williams BT
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2018 Feb; 61(2):428-435. PubMed ID: 29396580
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.