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 *

104 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8290305)

  • 1. A Revised Speech Intelligibility Rating (RSIR) test: listeners with normal hearing.
    Speaks C; Trine TD; Crain TR; Niccum N
    Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 1994 Jan; 110(1):75-83. PubMed ID: 8290305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Intelligibility of selected passages from the Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) test.
    Beck WG; Speaks C
    J Speech Hear Res; 1993 Oct; 36(5):1075-82. PubMed ID: 8246473
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Use of the Connected Speech Test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners.
    Cox RM; Alexander GC; Gilmore C; Pusakulich KM
    Ear Hear; 1988 Aug; 9(4):198-207. PubMed ID: 3169400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Development of the Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) test for hearing aid comparisons.
    Cox RM; McDaniel DM
    J Speech Hear Res; 1989 Jun; 32(2):347-52. PubMed ID: 2739387
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Word recognition for temporally and spectrally distorted materials: the effects of age and hearing loss.
    Smith SL; Pichora-Fuller MK; Wilson RH; Macdonald EN
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(3):349-66. PubMed ID: 22343546
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Development of the Connected Speech Test (CST).
    Cox RM; Alexander GC; Gilmore C
    Ear Hear; 1987 Oct; 8(5 Suppl):119S-126S. PubMed ID: 3678650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of noise suppression on intelligibility: experts' opinions and naive normal-hearing listeners' performance.
    Hilkhuysen GL; Gaubitch N; Huckvale M
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2013 Apr; 56(2):404-15. PubMed ID: 23090965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Comparison of objective and subjective measures of speech intelligibility in elderly hearing-impaired listeners.
    Cox RM; Alexander GC; Rivera IM
    J Speech Hear Res; 1991 Aug; 34(4):904-15. PubMed ID: 1956197
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The Self-Assessed Békesy Procedure: Validation of a Method to Measure Intelligibility of Connected Discourse.
    Decruy L; Das N; Verschueren E; Francart T
    Trends Hear; 2018; 22():2331216518802702. PubMed ID: 30289020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Development of the Russian matrix sentence test.
    Warzybok A; Zokoll M; Wardenga N; Ozimek E; Boboshko M; Kollmeier B
    Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():35-43. PubMed ID: 25843088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of the speech intelligibility rating (SIR) test for hearing aid comparisons.
    McDaniel DM; Cox RM
    J Speech Hear Res; 1992 Jun; 35(3):686-93. PubMed ID: 1608261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Perceptual effects of noise reduction with respect to personal preference, speech intelligibility, and listening effort.
    Brons I; Houben R; Dreschler WA
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(1):29-41. PubMed ID: 22874643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Audiovisual asynchrony detection and speech intelligibility in noise with moderate to severe sensorineural hearing impairment.
    Başkent D; Bazo D
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(5):582-92. PubMed ID: 21389856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Listener-assessed intelligibility of hearing aid-processed speech.
    Punch JL; Howard MT
    J Am Aud Soc; 1978; 4(2):69-76. PubMed ID: 738919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Development of the Listening in Spatialized Noise-Sentences Test (LISN-S).
    Cameron S; Dillon H
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):196-211. PubMed ID: 17496671
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. The development and evaluation of the Finnish Matrix Sentence Test for speech intelligibility assessment.
    Dietz A; Buschermöhle M; Aarnisalo AA; Vanhanen A; Hyyrynen T; Aaltonen O; Löppönen H; Zokoll MA; Kollmeier B
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2014 Jul; 134(7):728-37. PubMed ID: 24807850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. 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]  

  • 20. Intelligibility ratings of continuous discourse: application to hearing aid selection.
    Cox RM; McDaniel DM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1984 Sep; 76(3):758-66. PubMed ID: 6491048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.