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: 8046148)

  • 1. Quality ratings for frequency-shaped peak-clipped speech.
    Kates JM; Kozma-Spytek L
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1994 Jun; 95(6):3586-94. PubMed ID: 8046148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Quality ratings for frequency-shaped peak-clipped speech: results for listeners with hearing loss.
    Kozma-Spytek L; Kates JM; Revoile SG
    J Speech Hear Res; 1996 Dec; 39(6):1115-23. PubMed ID: 8959597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Coherence and the speech intelligibility index.
    Kates JM; Arehart KH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2005 Apr; 117(4 Pt 1):2224-37. PubMed ID: 15898663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Sentence intelligibility during segmental interruption and masking by speech-modulated noise: Effects of age and hearing loss.
    Fogerty D; Ahlstrom JB; Bologna WJ; Dubno JR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Jun; 137(6):3487-501. PubMed ID: 26093436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effect of peak clipping on speech recognition threshold.
    Crain TR; Van Tasell DJ
    Ear Hear; 1994 Dec; 15(6):443-53. PubMed ID: 7895940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Preference judgments of artificial processed and hearing-aid transduced speech.
    Versfeld NJ; Festen JM; Houtgast T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Sep; 106(3 Pt 1):1566-78. PubMed ID: 10489712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. On a reference-free speech quality estimator for hearing aids.
    Suelzle D; Parsa V; Falk TH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 May; 133(5):EL412-8. PubMed ID: 23656102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Phoneme recognition in vocoded maskers by normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners.
    Phatak SA; Grant KW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):859-66. PubMed ID: 25096119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Speech perception with combined electric-acoustic stimulation and bilateral cochlear implants in a multisource noise field.
    Rader T; Fastl H; Baumann U
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):324-32. PubMed ID: 23263408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Speech and music quality ratings for linear and nonlinear hearing aid circuitry.
    Davies-Venn E; Souza P; Fabry D
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2007 Sep; 18(8):688-99. PubMed ID: 18326155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Perception of nonlinear distortion by hearing-impaired people.
    Tan CT; Moore BC
    Int J Audiol; 2008 May; 47(5):246-56. PubMed ID: 18465409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. The effect of noise envelope modulation on quality judgments of noisy speech.
    Jin IK; Kates JM; Arehart KH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Oct; 132(4):EL277-83. PubMed ID: 23039565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effects of frequency lowering on speech perception in noise with adult hearing-aid users.
    Miller CW; Bates E; Brennan M
    Int J Audiol; 2016; 55(5):305-12. PubMed ID: 26938846
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Large-scale training to increase speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in novel noises.
    Chen J; Wang Y; Yoho SE; Wang D; Healy EW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 May; 139(5):2604. PubMed ID: 27250154
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Understanding compression: modeling the effects of dynamic-range compression in hearing aids.
    Kates JM
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Jun; 49(6):395-409. PubMed ID: 20225931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Detection threshold for sound distortion resulting from noise reduction in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Brons I; Dreschler WA; Houben R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Sep; 136(3):1375. PubMed ID: 25190410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.