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

982 related items for PubMed ID: 24495441

  • 1. Evaluation of the sparse coding shrinkage noise reduction algorithm in normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners.
    Sang J, Hu H, Zheng C, Li G, Lutman ME, Bleeck S.
    Hear Res; 2014 Apr; 310():36-47. PubMed ID: 24495441
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Speech quality evaluation of a sparse coding shrinkage noise reduction algorithm with normal hearing and hearing impaired listeners.
    Sang J, Hu H, Zheng C, Li G, Lutman ME, Bleeck S.
    Hear Res; 2015 Sep; 327():175-85. PubMed ID: 26232529
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. 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]

  • 4. Speech intelligibility benefits of hearing AIDS at various input levels.
    Kuk F, Lau CC, Korhonen P, Crose B.
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Mar 30; 26(3):275-88. PubMed ID: 25751695
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Evaluation of model-based versus non-parametric monaural noise-reduction approaches for hearing aids.
    Harlander N, Rosenkranz T, Hohmann V.
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Aug 30; 51(8):627-39. PubMed ID: 22642311
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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 30; 144(3):1627. PubMed ID: 30424625
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. A psychophysical evaluation of spectral enhancement.
    DiGiovanni JJ, Nelson PB, Schlauch RS.
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Oct 30; 48(5):1121-35. PubMed ID: 16411801
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Improving word recognition in noise among hearing-impaired subjects with a single-channel cochlear noise-reduction algorithm.
    Fink N, Furst M, Muchnik C.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Sep 30; 132(3):1718-31. PubMed ID: 22978899
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Auditory models of suprathreshold distortion and speech intelligibility in persons with impaired hearing.
    Bernstein JG, Summers V, Grassi E, Grant KW.
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Apr 30; 24(4):307-28. PubMed ID: 23636211
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. 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 30; 125(5):3358-72. PubMed ID: 19425676
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. 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 30; 48(3):702-14. PubMed ID: 16197282
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Real-time multiband dynamic compression and noise reduction for binaural hearing aids.
    Kollmeier B, Peissig J, Hohmann V.
    J Rehabil Res Dev; 1993 Jun 30; 30(1):82-94. PubMed ID: 8263832
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Evaluation of combined dynamic compression and single channel noise reduction for hearing aid applications.
    Kortlang S, Chen Z, Gerkmann T, Kollmeier B, Hohmann V, Ewert SD.
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jun 30; 57(sup3):S43-S54. PubMed ID: 28355947
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Effects of noise, nonlinear processing, and linear filtering on perceived speech quality.
    Arehart KH, Kates JM, Anderson MC.
    Ear Hear; 2010 Jun 30; 31(3):420-36. PubMed ID: 20440116
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. 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]

  • 16. Detection threshold for sound distortion resulting from noise reduction in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Brons I, Dreschler WA, Houben R.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Sep 30; 136(3):1375. PubMed ID: 25190410
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Effect of Energy Equalization on the Intelligibility of Speech in Fluctuating Background Interference for Listeners With Hearing Impairment.
    D'Aquila LA, Desloge JG, Reed CM, Braida LD.
    Trends Hear; 2017 Sep 30; 21():2331216517710354. PubMed ID: 28602128
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Suprathreshold auditory processing and speech perception in noise: hearing-impaired and normal-hearing listeners.
    Summers V, Makashay MJ, Theodoroff SM, Leek MR.
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Apr 30; 24(4):274-92. PubMed ID: 23636209
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 20. An algorithm to improve speech recognition in noise for hearing-impaired listeners.
    Healy EW, Yoho SE, Wang Y, Wang D.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct 30; 134(4):3029-38. PubMed ID: 24116438
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 50.