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 *

110 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8572072)

  • 21. Contribution of high frequencies to speech recognition in quiet and noise in listeners with varying degrees of high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss.
    Amos NE; Humes LE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Aug; 50(4):819-34. PubMed ID: 17675588
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Speech recognition with varying numbers and types of competing talkers by normal-hearing, cochlear-implant, and implant simulation subjects.
    Cullington HE; Zeng FG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Jan; 123(1):450-61. PubMed ID: 18177173
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The benefits of remote microphone technology for adults with cochlear implants.
    Fitzpatrick EM; Séguin C; Schramm DR; Armstrong S; Chénier J
    Ear Hear; 2009 Oct; 30(5):590-9. PubMed ID: 19561509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Northwestern University Auditory Test No. 6 in multi-talker babble: a preliminary report.
    Wilson RH; Strouse A
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 2002; 39(1):105-13. PubMed ID: 11926322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The effect of noise-induced hearing loss on the intelligibility of speech in noise.
    Smoorenburg GF; de Laat JA; Plomp R
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1982; 16():123-33. PubMed ID: 6962506
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. [Speech tests: application in individuals with noise induced hearing loss].
    Moreira RR; Ferreira Junior M
    Pro Fono; 2004; 16(3):293-300. PubMed ID: 15609584
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A model for the speech-reception threshold in noise without and with a hearing aid.
    Plomp R; Duquesnoy AJ
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1982; 15():95-111. PubMed ID: 6955931
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Children's speech recognition scores: the Speech Intelligibility Index and proficiency factors for age and hearing level.
    Scollie SD
    Ear Hear; 2008 Aug; 29(4):543-56. PubMed ID: 18469717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Auditory dysfunction in occupational noise exposed workers.
    Sallustio V; Portalatini P; Soleo L; Cassano F; Pesola G; Lasorsa G; Quaranta N; Salonna I
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1998; 48():95-110. PubMed ID: 9505302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Speech-in-noise screening tests by internet, part 1: test evaluation for noise-induced hearing loss identification.
    Leensen MC; de Laat JA; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Nov; 50(11):823-34. PubMed ID: 21988504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Speech intelligibility in background noise with ideal binary time-frequency masking.
    Wang D; Kjems U; Pedersen MS; Boldt JB; Lunner T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Apr; 125(4):2336-47. PubMed ID: 19354408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Auditory and auditory-visual intelligibility of speech in fluctuating maskers for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Bernstein JG; Grant KW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 May; 125(5):3358-72. PubMed ID: 19425676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Central masking effects on spondee threshold as a function of masker sensation level and masker sound pressure level.
    Martin FN; Digiovanni D
    J Am Audiol Soc; 1979; 4(4):141-6. PubMed ID: 422425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effects of periodic masker interruption on the intelligibility of interrupted speech.
    Iyer N; Brungart DS; Simpson BD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Sep; 122(3):1693. PubMed ID: 17927429
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Speech recognition abilities in noise for children with severe-to-profound unilateral hearing impairment.
    Ruscetta MN; Arjmand EM; Pratt SR
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2005 Jun; 69(6):771-9. PubMed ID: 15885329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A comparison of recognition performances in speech-spectrum noise by listeners with normal hearing on PB-50, CID W-22, NU-6, W-1 spondaic words, and monosyllabic digits spoken by the same speaker.
    Wilson RH; McArdle R; Roberts H
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2008 Jun; 19(6):496-506. PubMed ID: 19253782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Speech intelligibility in noise with ear protectors.
    Abel SM; Alberti PW; Riko K
    J Otolaryngol; 1980 Jun; 9(3):256-65. PubMed ID: 7001041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [Intelligibility of monosyllables in relation to tone hearing in noise-induced hearing loss].
    Tymnik G; Stange E; Lessing G; Zobelt U
    Laryngol Rhinol Otol (Stuttg); 1987 Jun; 66(6):335-7. PubMed ID: 3626717
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Disturbed speech intelligibility in noise despite a normal audiogram: a defect in temporal resolution?
    Rappaport JM; Phillips DP; Gulliver JM
    J Otolaryngol; 1993 Dec; 22(6):447-53. PubMed ID: 8158743
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. [Prediction of speech audiometry as compared to pure-tone audiometry in the estimation of the importance of noise].
    De Heyn G
    Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg; 1986; 40(4):615-27. PubMed ID: 3799179
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

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