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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

221 related items for PubMed ID: 19739761

  • 21. Speech perception of noise with binary gains.
    Wang D, Kjems U, Pedersen MS, Boldt JB, Lunner T.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Oct; 124(4):2303-7. PubMed ID: 19062868
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. Speech intelligibility in reverberation with ideal binary masking: effects of early reflections and signal-to-noise ratio threshold.
    Roman N, Woodruff J.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1707-17. PubMed ID: 23464040
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. Predicting the intelligibility of vocoded speech.
    Chen F, Loizou PC.
    Ear Hear; 2011 Mar; 32(3):331-8. PubMed ID: 21206363
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. A deep learning based segregation algorithm to increase speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in reverberant-noisy conditions.
    Zhao Y, Wang D, Johnson EM, Healy EW.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Sep; 144(3):1627. PubMed ID: 30424625
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 25. Factors influencing intelligibility of ideal binary-masked speech: implications for noise reduction.
    Li N, Loizou PC.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Mar; 123(3):1673-82. PubMed ID: 18345855
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28. Extension and evaluation of a near-end listening enhancement algorithm for listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Rennies J, Drefs J, Hülsmeier D, Schepker H, Doclo S.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Apr; 141(4):2526. PubMed ID: 28464693
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29. Channel selection in the modulation domain for improved speech intelligibility in noise.
    Wójcicki KK, Loizou PC.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Apr; 131(4):2904-13. PubMed ID: 22501068
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. A comparative intelligibility study of single-microphone noise reduction algorithms.
    Hu Y, Loizou PC.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Sep; 122(3):1777. PubMed ID: 17927437
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Microscopic prediction of speech intelligibility in spatially distributed speech-shaped noise for normal-hearing listeners.
    Geravanchizadeh M, Fallah A.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Dec; 138(6):4004-15. PubMed ID: 26723354
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32. 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 30; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721922
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. Acoustic and perceptual effects of magnifying interaural difference cues in a simulated "binaural" hearing aid.
    de Taillez T, Grimm G, Kollmeier B, Neher T.
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun 30; 57(sup3):S81-S91. PubMed ID: 28395561
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. The potential of onset enhancement for increased speech intelligibility in auditory prostheses.
    Koning R, Wouters J.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Oct 30; 132(4):2569-81. PubMed ID: 23039450
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35. Effect of the division between early and late reflections on intelligibility of ideal binary-masked speech.
    Li J, Xia R, Fang Q, Li A, Pan J, Yan Y.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 May 30; 137(5):2801-10. PubMed ID: 25994708
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. 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 May 30; 33(3):349-66. PubMed ID: 22343546
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. Intelligibility of conversational and clear speech in noise and reverberation for listeners with normal and impaired hearing.
    Payton KL, Uchanski RM, Braida LD.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1994 Mar 30; 95(3):1581-92. PubMed ID: 8176061
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Extending the articulation index to account for non-linear distortions introduced by noise-suppression algorithms.
    Loizou PC, Ma J.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Aug 30; 130(2):986-95. PubMed ID: 21877811
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39. 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 30; 56(2):404-15. PubMed ID: 23090965
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40. 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 Apr 30; 36(5):505-16. PubMed ID: 25985016
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 12.