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 *

194 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36137862)

  • 1. An overview of the HASPI and HASQI metrics for predicting speech intelligibility and speech quality for normal hearing, hearing loss, and hearing aids.
    Kates JM; Arehart KH
    Hear Res; 2022 Dec; 426():108608. PubMed ID: 36137862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Using Objective Metrics to Measure Hearing Aid Performance.
    Kates JM; Arehart KH; Anderson MC; Kumar Muralimanohar R; Harvey LO
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(6):1165-1175. PubMed ID: 29554034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Improving the performance of hearing aids in noisy environments based on deep learning technology.
    Lai YH; Zheng WZ; Tang ST; Fang SH; Liao WH; Tsao Y
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2018 Jul; 2018():404-408. PubMed ID: 30440419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. A comparison of speech intelligibility and subjective quality with hearing-aid processing in older adults with hearing loss.
    Arehart KH; Chon SH; Lundberg EMH; Harvey LO; Kates JM; Anderson MC; Rallapalli VH; Souza PE
    Int J Audiol; 2022 Jan; 61(1):46-58. PubMed ID: 33913795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Extending the Hearing-Aid Speech Perception Index (HASPI): Keywords, sentences, and context.
    Kates JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2023 Mar; 153(3):1662. PubMed ID: 37002064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of noise, nonlinear processing, and linear filtering on perceived speech quality.
    Arehart KH; Kates JM; Anderson MC
    Ear Hear; 2010 Jun; 31(3):420-36. PubMed ID: 20440116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effects of noise reduction on speech intelligibility, perceived listening effort, and personal preference in hearing-impaired listeners.
    Brons I; Houben R; Dreschler WA
    Trends Hear; 2014 Oct; 18():. PubMed ID: 25315377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Working memory, age, and hearing loss: susceptibility to hearing aid distortion.
    Arehart KH; Souza P; Baca R; Kates JM
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):251-60. PubMed ID: 23291963
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Determining perceived sound quality in a simulated hearing aid using the international speech test signal.
    Arehart KH; Kates JM; Anderson MC; Moats P
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(4):533-5. PubMed ID: 21325947
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Task-Dependent Effects of Signal Audibility for Processing Speech: Comparing Performance With NAL-NL2 and DSL v5 Hearing Aid Prescriptions at Threshold and at Suprathreshold Levels in 9- to 17-Year-Olds With Hearing Loss.
    Pittman AL; Stewart EC
    Trends Hear; 2023; 27():23312165231177509. PubMed ID: 37254534
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. A comparison of gain for adults from generic hearing aid prescriptive methods: impacts on predicted loudness, frequency bandwidth, and speech intelligibility.
    Johnson EE; Dillon H
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2011; 22(7):441-59. PubMed ID: 21993050
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effects of multi-channel compression time constants on subjectively perceived sound quality and speech intelligibility.
    Hansen M
    Ear Hear; 2002 Aug; 23(4):369-80. PubMed ID: 12195179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Integrating cognitive and peripheral factors in predicting hearing-aid processing effectiveness.
    Kates JM; Arehart KH; Souza PE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Dec; 134(6):4458. PubMed ID: 25669257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Investigation of Extended Bandwidth Hearing Aid Amplification on Speech Intelligibility and Sound Quality in Adults with Mild-to-Moderate Hearing Loss.
    Seeto A; Searchfield GD
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2018 Mar; 29(3):243-254. PubMed ID: 29488874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Effect of slow-acting wide dynamic range compression on measures of intelligibility and ratings of speech quality in simulated-loss listeners.
    Rosengard PS; Payton KL; Braida LD
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Jun; 48(3):702-14. PubMed ID: 16197282
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Listener Performance with a Novel Hearing Aid Frequency Lowering Technique.
    Kirby BJ; Kopun JG; Spratford M; Mollak CM; Brennan MA; McCreery RW
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Oct; 28(9):810-822. PubMed ID: 28972470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.