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 *

91 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10955643)

  • 1. Intensity discrimination and detection of amplitude modulation in electric hearing.
    Donaldson GS; Viemeister NF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 Aug; 108(2):760-3. PubMed ID: 10955643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Intensity discrimination and increment detection in cochlear-implant users.
    Wojtczak M; Donaldson GS; Viemeister NF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Jul; 114(1):396-407. PubMed ID: 12880051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Studies of prosody perception by cochlear implant patients.
    Richardson LM; Busby PA; Blamey PJ; Clark GM
    Audiology; 1998; 37(4):231-45. PubMed ID: 9723769
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Spectrotemporal Modulation Sensitivity in Cochlear-Implant and Normal-Hearing Listeners: Is the Performance Driven by Temporal or Spectral Modulation Sensitivity?
    Zhou N; Dixon S; Zhu Z; Dong L; Weiner M
    Trends Hear; 2020; 24():2331216520948385. PubMed ID: 32895024
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Assessment of Spectral and Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users Using Psychoacoustic Discrimination and Speech Cue Categorization.
    Winn MB; Won JH; Moon IJ
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(6):e377-e390. PubMed ID: 27438871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of amplitude nonlinearity on phoneme recognition by cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners.
    Fu QJ; Shannon RV
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 Nov; 104(5):2570-7. PubMed ID: 9821336
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Nonlinguistic Outcome Measures in Adult Cochlear Implant Users Over the First Year of Implantation.
    Drennan WR; Won JH; Timme AO; Rubinstein JT
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):354-64. PubMed ID: 26656317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Auditory memory for random time patterns in cochlear implant listeners.
    Kang H; Macherey O; Roman S; Pressnitzer D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2021 Sep; 150(3):1934. PubMed ID: 34598651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Spectrotemporal Modulation Detection and Speech Perception by Cochlear Implant Users.
    Won JH; Moon IJ; Jin S; Park H; Woo J; Cho YS; Chung WH; Hong SH
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(10):e0140920. PubMed ID: 26485715
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of stimulation rate on phoneme recognition by nucleus-22 cochlear implant listeners.
    Fu QJ; Shannon RV
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 Jan; 107(1):589-97. PubMed ID: 10641667
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Temporal modulation transfer functions in patients with cochlear implants.
    Shannon RV
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Apr; 91(4 Pt 1):2156-64. PubMed ID: 1597606
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Speech prosody perception in cochlear implant users with and without residual hearing.
    Marx M; James C; Foxton J; Capber A; Fraysse B; Barone P; Deguine O
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(2):239-48. PubMed ID: 25303861
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Spatial Release From Masking in Simulated Cochlear Implant Users With and Without Access to Low-Frequency Acoustic Hearing.
    Williges B; Dietz M; Hohmann V; Jürgens T
    Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721918
    [TBL] [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; 344():50-61. PubMed ID: 27838372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for normal-hearing listeners and patients with cochlear implants.
    Dorman MF; Loizou PC
    Am J Otol; 1997 Nov; 18(6 Suppl):S113-4. PubMed ID: 9391623
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Preservation of hearing in cochlear implant surgery: advantages of combined electrical and acoustical speech processing.
    Gantz BJ; Turner C; Gfeller KE; Lowder MW
    Laryngoscope; 2005 May; 115(5):796-802. PubMed ID: 15867642
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Recognition of spectrally asynchronous speech by normal-hearing listeners and Nucleus-22 cochlear implant users.
    Fu QJ; Galvin JJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Mar; 109(3):1166-72. PubMed ID: 11303930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech recognition by normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners as a function of intensity resolution.
    Loizou PC; Dorman M; Poroy O; Spahr T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 Nov; 108(5 Pt 1):2377-87. PubMed ID: 11108378
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Mathematical modeling of vowel perception by users of analog multichannel cochlear implants: temporal and channel-amplitude cues.
    Svirsky MA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 Mar; 107(3):1521-9. PubMed ID: 10738806
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Masking release with changing fundamental frequency: Electric acoustic stimulation resembles normal hearing subjects.
    Auinger AB; Riss D; Liepins R; Rader T; Keck T; Keintzel T; Kaider A; Baumgartner WD; Gstoettner W; Arnoldner C
    Hear Res; 2017 Jul; 350():226-234. PubMed ID: 28527538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.