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 *

333 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9670535)

  • 1. High-frequency audibility: benefits for hearing-impaired listeners.
    Hogan CA; Turner CW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 Jul; 104(1):432-41. PubMed ID: 9670535
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Benefits of amplification for speech recognition in background noise.
    Turner CW; Henry BA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2002 Oct; 112(4):1675-80. PubMed ID: 12398472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Audibility-index predictions of normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners' performance on the connected speech test.
    Sherbecoe RL; Studebaker GA
    Ear Hear; 2003 Feb; 24(1):71-88. PubMed ID: 12598814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Improving speech audibility with wide dynamic range compression in listeners with severe sensorineural loss.
    Souza PE; Bishop RD
    Ear Hear; 1999 Dec; 20(6):461-70. PubMed ID: 10613384
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Providing low- and mid-frequency speech information to listeners with sensorineural hearing loss.
    Turner CW; Brus SL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Jun; 109(6):2999-3006. PubMed ID: 11425142
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Quantifying the contribution of audibility to recognition of compression-amplified speech.
    Souza PE; Turner CW
    Ear Hear; 1999 Feb; 20(1):12-20. PubMed ID: 10037062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Improving audibility with nonlinear amplification for listeners with high-frequency loss.
    Souza PE; Bishop RD
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2000 Apr; 11(4):214-23. PubMed ID: 10783924
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Application of frequency importance functions to directivity for prediction of benefit in uniform fields.
    Ricketts TA; Henry PP; Hornsby BW
    Ear Hear; 2005 Oct; 26(5):473-86. PubMed ID: 16230897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Speech audibility for listeners with high-frequency hearing loss.
    Turner CW; Cummings KJ
    Am J Audiol; 1999 Jun; 8(1):47-56. PubMed ID: 10499119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Using a vocoder-based frequency-lowering method and spectral enhancement to improve place-of-articulation perception for hearing-impaired listeners.
    Kong YY; Mullangi A
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):300-12. PubMed ID: 23165224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Spectral contributions to the benefit from spatial separation of speech and noise.
    Dubno JR; Ahlstrom JB; Horwitz AR
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2002 Dec; 45(6):1297-310. PubMed ID: 12546495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Limiting spectral resolution in speech for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss.
    Turner CW; Chi SL; Flock S
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 1999 Aug; 42(4):773-84. PubMed ID: 10450899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Auditory filter characteristics and consonant recognition for hearing-impaired listeners.
    Dubno JR; Dirks DD
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1989 Apr; 85(4):1666-75. PubMed ID: 2708682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Stop-consonant recognition for normal-hearing listeners and listeners with high-frequency hearing loss. II: Articulation index predictions.
    Dubno JR; Dirks DD; Schaefer AB
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1989 Jan; 85(1):355-64. PubMed ID: 2921418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Proportional frequency compression of speech for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss.
    Turner CW; Hurtig RR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Aug; 106(2):877-86. PubMed ID: 10462793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effects of audibility and multichannel wide dynamic range compression on consonant recognition for listeners with severe hearing loss.
    Davies-Venn E; Souza P; Brennan M; Stecker GC
    Ear Hear; 2009 Oct; 30(5):494-504. PubMed ID: 19633563
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Perception of voiceless fricatives by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired children and adults.
    Pittman AL; Stelmachowicz PG
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2000 Dec; 43(6):1389-401. PubMed ID: 11193960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Speech recognition of hearing-impaired listeners: predictions from audibility and the limited role of high-frequency amplification.
    Ching TY; Dillon H; Byrne D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 Feb; 103(2):1128-40. PubMed ID: 9479766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The effect of intensity perturbations on speech intelligibility for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    van Schijndel NH; Houtgast T; Festen JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 May; 109(5 Pt 1):2202-10. PubMed ID: 11386571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 17.