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

187 related items for PubMed ID: 33940919

  • 1. Speech intelligibility in a realistic virtual sound environment.
    Mansour N, Marschall M, May T, Westermann A, Dau T.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2021 Apr; 149(4):2791. PubMed ID: 33940919
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. The effect of hearing aid dynamic range compression on speech intelligibility in a realistic virtual sound environment.
    Mansour N, Marschall M, Westermann A, May T, Dau T.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2022 Jan; 151(1):232. PubMed ID: 35105015
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Speech reception with different bilateral directional processing schemes: Influence of binaural hearing, audiometric asymmetry, and acoustic scenario.
    Neher T, Wagener KC, Latzel M.
    Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 353():36-48. PubMed ID: 28783570
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. 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]

  • 5. Measuring and modeling speech intelligibility in real and loudspeaker-based virtual sound environments.
    Ahrens A, Marschall M, Dau T.
    Hear Res; 2019 Jun 30; 377():307-317. PubMed ID: 30867112
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. 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]

  • 7. Predicting speech intelligibility in hearing-impaired listeners using a physiologically inspired auditory model.
    Zaar J, Carney LH.
    Hear Res; 2022 Dec 30; 426():108553. PubMed ID: 35750575
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Characterizing the Speech Reception Threshold in hearing-impaired listeners in relation to masker type and masker level.
    Rhebergen KS, Pool RE, Dreschler WA.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Mar 30; 135(3):1491-505. PubMed ID: 24606285
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Modelling binaural unmasking and the intelligibility of speech in noise and reverberation for normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners.
    Vicente T, Buchholz JM, Lavandier M.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2021 Nov 30; 150(5):3275. PubMed ID: 34852607
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Large-scale training to increase speech intelligibility for hearing-impaired listeners in novel noises.
    Chen J, Wang Y, Yoho SE, Wang D, Healy EW.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 May 30; 139(5):2604. PubMed ID: 27250154
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Effects of attention on the speech reception threshold and pupil response of people with impaired and normal hearing.
    Koelewijn T, Versfeld NJ, Kramer SE.
    Hear Res; 2017 Oct 30; 354():56-63. PubMed ID: 28869841
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Better speech perception in noise with an assistive multimicrophone array for hearing AIDS.
    Luts H, Maj JB, Soede W, Wouters J.
    Ear Hear; 2004 Oct 30; 25(5):411-20. PubMed ID: 15599189
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Phoneme recognition in vocoded maskers by normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners.
    Phatak SA, Grant KW.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug 30; 136(2):859-66. PubMed ID: 25096119
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. A physiologically-inspired model reproducing the speech intelligibility benefit in cochlear implant listeners with residual acoustic hearing.
    Zamaninezhad L, Hohmann V, Büchner A, Schädler MR, Jürgens T.
    Hear Res; 2017 Feb 30; 344():50-61. PubMed ID: 27838372
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Development and evaluation of the Turkish matrix sentence test.
    Zokoll MA, Fidan D, Türkyılmaz D, Hochmuth S, Ergenç İ, Sennaroğlu G, Kollmeier B.
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Feb 30; 54 Suppl 2():51-61. PubMed ID: 26443486
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Listening through hearing aids affects spatial perception and speech intelligibility in normal-hearing listeners.
    Cubick J, Buchholz JM, Best V, Lavandier M, Dau T.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Nov 30; 144(5):2896. PubMed ID: 30522291
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Effects of directional sound processing and listener's motivation on EEG responses to continuous noisy speech: Do normal-hearing and aided hearing-impaired listeners differ?
    Mirkovic B, Debener S, Schmidt J, Jaeger M, Neher T.
    Hear Res; 2019 Jun 30; 377():260-270. PubMed ID: 31003037
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Head shadow enhancement with low-frequency beamforming improves sound localization and speech perception for simulated bimodal listeners.
    Dieudonné B, Francart T.
    Hear Res; 2018 Jun 30; 363():78-84. PubMed ID: 29555110
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. 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]

  • 20. The interpretation of speech reception threshold data in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired listeners: II. Fluctuating noise.
    Smits C, Festen JM.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 May 30; 133(5):3004-15. PubMed ID: 23654404
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 10.