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 *

67 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3430373)

  • 21. Evaluation of a new spectral peak coding strategy for the Nucleus 22 Channel Cochlear Implant System.
    Skinner MW; Clark GM; Whitford LA; Seligman PM; Staller SJ; Shipp DB; Shallop JK; Everingham C; Menapace CM; Arndt PL
    Am J Otol; 1994 Nov; 15 Suppl 2():15-27. PubMed ID: 8572106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The benefit obtained from visually displayed text from an automatic speech recognizer during listening to speech presented in noise.
    Zekveld AA; Kramer SE; Kessens JM; Vlaming MS; Houtgast T
    Ear Hear; 2008 Dec; 29(6):838-52. PubMed ID: 18633325
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The effect of filtering on the intelligibility and quality of speech in noise.
    Neuman AC; Schwander TJ
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1987; 24(4):127-34. PubMed ID: 3430372
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Effect of two-microphone noise reduction on speech recognition by normal-hearing listeners.
    Schwander T; Levitt H
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1987; 24(4):87-92. PubMed ID: 3430393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Music perception of cochlear implant users compared with that of hearing aid users.
    Looi V; McDermott H; McKay C; Hickson L
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):421-34. PubMed ID: 18344870
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Clinical evaluation of higher stimulation rates in the nucleus research platform 8 system.
    Plant K; Holden L; Skinner M; Arcaroli J; Whitford L; Law MA; Nel E
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):381-93. PubMed ID: 17485987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Temporal envelope changes of compression and speech rate: combined effects on recognition for older adults.
    Jenstad LM; Souza PE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Oct; 50(5):1123-38. PubMed ID: 17905900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Comparison of a programmable 3-channel compression hearing system with single-channel AGC instruments.
    Kiessling J; Steffens T
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1993; 38():67-74. PubMed ID: 8153566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. A microprocessor-based acoustic hearing aid for the profoundly impaired listener.
    Rosen S; Walliker JR; Fourcin A; Ball V
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1987; 24(4):239-60. PubMed ID: 3430383
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Using genetic algorithms with subjective input from human subjects: implications for fitting hearing aids and cochlear implants.
    Başkent D; Eiler CL; Edwards B
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):370-80. PubMed ID: 17485986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. New developments in speech pattern element hearing aids for the profoundly deaf.
    Faulkner A; Walliker JR; Howard IS; Ball V; Fourcin AJ
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1993; 38():124-35. PubMed ID: 8153558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Speech distortion measures for hearing aids.
    Williamson MJ; Cummins KL; Hecox KE
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1987; 24(4):277-82. PubMed ID: 3430386
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Phonological mismatch makes aided speech recognition in noise cognitively taxing.
    Rudner M; Foo C; Rönnberg J; Lunner T
    Ear Hear; 2007 Dec; 28(6):879-92. PubMed ID: 17982373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Spectral contrast enhancement of speech in noise for listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment: effects on intelligibility, quality, and response times.
    Baer T; Moore BC; Gatehouse S
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1993; 30(1):49-72. PubMed ID: 8263829
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Comparison of multichannel tactile aids and multichannel cochlear implants in children with profound hearing impairments.
    Miyamoto RT; Robbins AM; Osberger MJ; Todd SL; Riley AI; Kirk KI
    Am J Otol; 1995 Jan; 16(1):8-13. PubMed ID: 8579182
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Speech recognition with the advanced combination encoder and transient emphasis spectral maxima strategies in nucleus 24 recipients.
    Holden LK; Vandali AE; Skinner MW; Fourakis MS; Holden TA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Jun; 48(3):681-701. PubMed ID: 16197281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Is psychological status a determinant of speech perception outcomes in highly selected good adolescent cochlear implant users?
    Yucel E; Sennaroglu G
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2007 Sep; 71(9):1415-22. PubMed ID: 17586056
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Signal processing for the profoundly deaf.
    Boothyroyd A
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():166-71. PubMed ID: 2192531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Multimicrophone adaptive beamforming for interference reduction in hearing aids.
    Peterson PM; Durlach NI; Rabinowitz WM; Zurek PM
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1987; 24(4):103-10. PubMed ID: 3430369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Effects of extended-range frequency-response amplification in hearing aids.
    Forrester JI; Raffin MJ
    J Aud Res; 1982 Jan; 22(1):37-43. PubMed ID: 7187908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.