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 *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38717201)

  • 21. Effects of spatial and temporal integration of a single early reflection on speech intelligibility.
    Warzybok A; Rennies J; Brand T; Doclo S; Kollmeier B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jan; 133(1):269-82. PubMed ID: 23297901
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Contribution of binaural masking release to improved speech intelligibility for different masker types.
    Sutojo S; van de Par S; Schoenmaker E
    Eur J Neurosci; 2020 Mar; 51(5):1339-1352. PubMed ID: 29855098
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Bilateral Versus Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adult Listeners: Speech-On-Speech Masking and Multitalker Localization.
    Rana B; Buchholz JM; Morgan C; Sharma M; Weller T; Konganda SA; Shirai K; Kawano A
    Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517722106. PubMed ID: 28752811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Role of Binaural Temporal Fine Structure and Envelope Cues in Cocktail-Party Listening.
    Swaminathan J; Mason CR; Streeter TM; Best V; Roverud E; Kidd G
    J Neurosci; 2016 Aug; 36(31):8250-7. PubMed ID: 27488643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Spatial release from masking with noise-vocoded speech.
    Freyman RL; Balakrishnan U; Helfer KS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Sep; 124(3):1627-37. PubMed ID: 19045654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Effect of fundamental-frequency and sentence-onset differences on speech-identification performance of young and older adults in a competing-talker background.
    Lee JH; Humes LE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep; 132(3):1700-17. PubMed ID: 22978898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Multichannel speech intelligibility and talker recognition using monaural, binaural, and three-dimensional auditory presentation.
    Drullman R; Bronkhorst AW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 Apr; 107(4):2224-35. PubMed ID: 10790048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Spatial Release From Masking in Children: Effects of Simulated Unilateral Hearing Loss.
    Corbin NE; Buss E; Leibold LJ
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(2):223-235. PubMed ID: 27787392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. The benefit of head orientation to speech intelligibility in noise.
    Grange JA; Culling JF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Feb; 139(2):703-12. PubMed ID: 26936554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Effect of priming on energetic and informational masking in a same-different task.
    Jones JA; Freyman RL
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(1):124-33. PubMed ID: 21841488
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The effect of room acoustical parameters on speech reception thresholds and spatial release from masking.
    Biberger T; Ewert SD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2019 Oct; 146(4):2188. PubMed ID: 31671969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Pupil dilation uncovers extra listening effort in the presence of a single-talker masker.
    Koelewijn T; Zekveld AA; Festen JM; Kramer SE
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(2):291-300. PubMed ID: 21921797
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Modeling the effects of a single reflection on binaural speech intelligibility.
    Rennies J; Warzybok A; Brand T; Kollmeier B
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar; 135(3):1556-67. PubMed ID: 24606290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The Contribution of Individual Differences in Memory Span and Language Ability to Spatial Release From Masking in Young Children.
    MacCutcheon D; Pausch F; Füllgrabe C; Eccles R; van der Linde J; Panebianco C; Fels J; Ljung R
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2019 Oct; 62(10):3741-3751. PubMed ID: 31619115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Effects of a consistent target or masker voice on target speech intelligibility in two- and three-talker mixtures.
    Samson F; Johnsrude IS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Mar; 139(3):1037-46. PubMed ID: 27036241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Speech reception with different bilateral directional processing schemes: Influence of binaural hearing, audiometric asymmetry, and acoustic scenario.
    Neher T; Wagener KC; Latzel M
    Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 353():36-48. PubMed ID: 28783570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Benefits of knowing who, where, and when in multi-talker listening.
    Kitterick PT; Bailey PJ; Summerfield AQ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Apr; 127(4):2498-508. PubMed ID: 20370032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Sentence Recognition in Steady-State Speech-Shaped Noise versus Four-Talker Babble.
    Vermiglio AJ; Herring CC; Heeke P; Post CE; Fang X
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2019 Jan; 30(1):54-65. PubMed ID: 30461388
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The effects of fundamental frequency contour manipulations on speech intelligibility in background noise.
    Miller SE; Schlauch RS; Watson PJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Jul; 128(1):435-43. PubMed ID: 20649237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Signal envelope and speech intelligibility differentially impact auditory motion perception.
    Warnecke M; Litovsky RY
    Sci Rep; 2021 Jul; 11(1):15117. PubMed ID: 34302032
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.