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 *

93 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8959598)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. Effect of temporal envelope smearing on speech reception.
    Drullman R; Festen JM; Plomp R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1994 Feb; 95(2):1053-64. PubMed ID: 8132899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The intelligibility of speech with "holes" in the spectrum.
    Kasturi K; Loizou PC; Dorman M; Spahr T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Sep; 112(3 Pt 1):1102-11. PubMed ID: 12243158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Audibility of American English vowels produced by English-, Chinese-, and Korean-native speakers in long-term speech-shaped noise.
    Liu C; Jin SH
    Hear Res; 2011 Dec; 282(1-2):49-55. PubMed ID: 21920420
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Effects of Slow- and Fast-Acting Compression on Hearing-Impaired Listeners' Consonant-Vowel Identification in Interrupted Noise.
    Kowalewski B; Zaar J; Fereczkowski M; MacDonald EN; Strelcyk O; May T; Dau T
    Trends Hear; 2018; 22():2331216518800870. PubMed ID: 30311552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Comparison of frequency selectivity and consonant recognition among hearing-impaired and masked normal-hearing listeners.
    Dubno JR; Schaefer AB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Apr; 91(4 Pt 1):2110-21. PubMed ID: 1597602
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Effects of presentation level on phoneme and sentence recognition in quiet by cochlear implant listeners.
    Donaldson GS; Allen SL
    Ear Hear; 2003 Oct; 24(5):392-405. PubMed ID: 14534410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Perceptual weighting of stop consonant cues by normal and impaired listeners in reverberation versus noise.
    Hedrick MS; Younger MS
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2007 Apr; 50(2):254-69. PubMed ID: 17463228
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Consonant confusions in white noise.
    Phatak SA; Lovitt A; Allen JB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Aug; 124(2):1220-33. PubMed ID: 18681609
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Sources of Variability in Consonant Perception and Implications for Speech Perception Modeling.
    Zaar J; Dau T
    Adv Exp Med Biol; 2016; 894():437-446. PubMed ID: 27080685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Effects of vowel context on the recognition of initial and medial consonants by cochlear implant users.
    Donaldson GS; Kreft HA
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):658-77. PubMed ID: 17086077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Older listeners' use of temporal cues altered by compression amplification.
    Souza PE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2000 Jun; 43(3):661-74. PubMed ID: 10877436
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Assessing the efficacy of hearing-aid amplification using a phoneme test.
    Scheidiger C; Allen JB; Dau T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Mar; 141(3):1739. PubMed ID: 28372055
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Masking release for consonant features in temporally fluctuating background noise.
    Füllgrabe C; Berthommier F; Lorenzi C
    Hear Res; 2006 Jan; 211(1-2):74-84. PubMed ID: 16289579
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Effects of Simulated Hearing Loss on Bilingual Children's Consonant Recognition in Noise.
    Nishi K; Trevino AC; Rosado Rogers L; García P; Neely ST
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(5):e292-e304. PubMed ID: 28353522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Children's phoneme identification in reverberation and noise.
    Johnson CE
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2000 Feb; 43(1):144-57. PubMed ID: 10668658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Speech intelligibility in cochlear implant simulations: Effects of carrier type, interfering noise, and subject experience.
    Whitmal NA; Poissant SF; Freyman RL; Helfer KS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Oct; 122(4):2376-88. PubMed ID: 17902872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. An investigation of input level range for the nucleus 24 cochlear implant system: speech perception performance, program preference, and loudness comfort ratings.
    James CJ; Skinner MW; Martin LF; Holden LK; Galvin KL; Holden TA; Whitford L
    Ear Hear; 2003 Apr; 24(2):157-74. PubMed ID: 12677112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Consonant recognition for spectrally degraded speech as a function of consonant-vowel intensity ratio.
    Balakrishnan U; Freyman RL; Chiang YC; Nerbonne GP; Shea KJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1996 Jun; 99(6):3758-69. PubMed ID: 8655807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Place-pitch sensitivity and its relation to consonant recognition by cochlear implant listeners using the MPEAK and SPEAK speech processing strategies.
    Donaldson GS; Nelson DA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 Mar; 107(3):1645-58. PubMed ID: 10738818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.