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 *

105 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32007021)

  • 1. Voice fundamental frequency differences and speech recognition with noise and speech maskers in cochlear implant recipients.
    Meister H; Walger M; Lang-Roth R; Müller V
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 Jan; 147(1):EL19. PubMed ID: 32007021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Masking release with changing fundamental frequency: Electric acoustic stimulation resembles normal hearing subjects.
    Auinger AB; Riss D; Liepins R; Rader T; Keck T; Keintzel T; Kaider A; Baumgartner WD; Gstoettner W; Arnoldner C
    Hear Res; 2017 Jul; 350():226-234. PubMed ID: 28527538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Factors Affecting Bimodal Benefit in Pediatric Mandarin-Speaking Chinese Cochlear Implant Users.
    Liu YW; Tao DD; Chen B; Cheng X; Shu Y; Galvin JJ; Fu QJ
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(6):1316-1327. PubMed ID: 30882534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Speech recognition with varying numbers and types of competing talkers by normal-hearing, cochlear-implant, and implant simulation subjects.
    Cullington HE; Zeng FG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Jan; 123(1):450-61. PubMed ID: 18177173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Speech Segregation in Active Middle Ear Stimulation: Masking Release With Changing Fundamental Frequency.
    Auinger AB; Liepins R; Kaider A; Vyskocil E; Riss D; Arnoldner C
    Ear Hear; 2021; 42(3):709-717. PubMed ID: 33369941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Spatial Release From Masking in Simulated Cochlear Implant Users With and Without Access to Low-Frequency Acoustic Hearing.
    Williges B; Dietz M; Hohmann V; Jürgens T
    Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cochlear implant speech recognition with speech maskers.
    Stickney GS; Zeng FG; Litovsky R; Assmann P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 Aug; 116(2):1081-91. PubMed ID: 15376674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Intelligibility in speech maskers with a binaural cochlear implant sound coding strategy inspired by the contralateral medial olivocochlear reflex.
    Lopez-Poveda EA; Eustaquio-Martín A; Stohl JS; Wolford RD; Schatzer R; Gorospe JM; Ruiz SSC; Benito F; Wilson BS
    Hear Res; 2017 May; 348():134-137. PubMed ID: 28188882
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Voice segregation by difference in fundamental frequency: effect of masker type.
    Deroche ML; Culling JF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Nov; 134(5):EL465-70. PubMed ID: 24181992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Developmental Effects in Children's Ability to Benefit From F0 Differences Between Target and Masker Speech.
    Flaherty MM; Buss E; Leibold LJ
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(4):927-937. PubMed ID: 30334835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Roles of the target and masker fundamental frequencies in voice segregation.
    Deroche ML; Culling JF; Chatterjee M; Limb CJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Sep; 136(3):1225. PubMed ID: 25190396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effectiveness of Two-Talker Maskers That Differ in Talker Congruity and Perceptual Similarity to the Target Speech.
    Calandruccio L; Buss E; Bowdrie K
    Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517709385. PubMed ID: 29169315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Head shadow, squelch, and summation effects with an energetic or informational masker in bilateral and bimodal CI users.
    Pyschny V; Landwehr M; Hahn M; Lang-Roth R; Walger M; Meister H
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2014 Oct; 57(5):1942-60. PubMed ID: 24825129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Psychophysical suppression effects for tonal and speech signals.
    Dubno JR; Ahlstrom JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Oct; 110(4):2108-19. PubMed ID: 11681388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Estimates of basilar-membrane nonlinearity effects on masking of tones and speech.
    Dubno JR; Horwitz AR; Ahlstrom JB
    Ear Hear; 2007 Feb; 28(1):2-17. PubMed ID: 17204895
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Recovery from prior stimulation: masking of speech by interrupted noise for younger and older adults with normal hearing.
    Dubno JR; Horwitz AR; Ahlstrom JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Apr; 113(4 Pt 1):2084-94. PubMed ID: 12703719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Impact of a moving noise masker on speech perception in cochlear implant users.
    Weissgerber T; Rader T; Baumann U
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(5):e0126133. PubMed ID: 25970594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The intelligibility of speech in a harmonic masker varying in fundamental frequency contour, broadband temporal envelope, and spatial location.
    Leclère T; Lavandier M; Deroche MLD
    Hear Res; 2017 Jul; 350():1-10. PubMed ID: 28390253
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Speech recognition in noise: estimating effects of compressive nonlinearities in the basilar-membrane response.
    Horwitz AR; Ahlstrom JB; Dubno JR
    Ear Hear; 2007 Sep; 28(5):682-93. PubMed ID: 17804982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.