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 *

220 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1481665)

  • 1. Phoneme recognition by deaf individuals using the multichannel nucleus cochlear implant.
    Mülder HE; Van Olphen AF; Bosman A; Smoorenburg GF
    Acta Otolaryngol; 1992 Nov; 112(6):946-55. PubMed ID: 1481665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Vowel and consonant recognition of cochlear implant patients using formant-estimating speech processors.
    Blamey PJ; Dowell RC; Brown AM; Clark GM; Seligman PM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1987 Jul; 82(1):48-57. PubMed ID: 3624640
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of vowel context on the recognition of initial and medial consonants by cochlear implant users.
    Donaldson GS; Kreft HA
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):658-77. PubMed ID: 17086077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Vowel and consonant recognition with the aid of a multichannel cochlear implant.
    Dorman MF; Dankowski K; McCandless G; Parkin JL; Smith L
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 1991 Aug; 43(3):585-601. PubMed ID: 1775658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Consonant and Vowel Identification in Cochlear Implant Users Measured by Nonsense Words: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
    Rødvik AK; von Koss Torkildsen J; Wie OB; Storaker MA; Silvola JT
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2018 Apr; 61(4):1023-1050. PubMed ID: 29623340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of channel-to-electrode mappings on speech reception with the ineraid cochlear implant.
    Rabinowitz WM; Eddington DK
    Ear Hear; 1995 Oct; 16(5):450-8. PubMed ID: 8654900
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Place coding of vowel formants for cochlear implant patients.
    Blamey PJ; Clark GM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1990 Aug; 88(2):667-73. PubMed ID: 2212290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of electrode location and spacing on phoneme recognition with the Nucleus-22 cochlear implant.
    Fu QJ; Shannon RV
    Ear Hear; 1999 Aug; 20(4):321-31. PubMed ID: 10466568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Identification of speech by cochlear implant recipients with the Multipeak (MPEAK) and Spectral Peak (SPEAK) speech coding strategies. I. Vowels.
    Skinner MW; Fourakis MS; Holden TA; Holden LK; Demorest ME
    Ear Hear; 1996 Jun; 17(3):182-97. PubMed ID: 8807261
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Performance of adult Ineraid and Nucleus cochlear implant patients after 3.5 years of use.
    Tyler RS; Lowder MW; Parkinson AJ; Woodworth GG; Gantz BJ
    Audiology; 1995; 34(3):135-44. PubMed ID: 8561691
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Patterns of phoneme perception errors by listeners with cochlear implants as a function of overall speech perception ability.
    Munson B; Donaldson GS; Allen SL; Collison EA; Nelson DA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Feb; 113(2):925-35. PubMed ID: 12597186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Vowel and consonant identification tests can be used to compare performances in a multilingual group of cochlear implant patients.
    Pelizzone M; Boëx C; Montandon P
    ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec; 1993; 55(6):341-6. PubMed ID: 8265119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Changes in vowel quality in post-lingually deafened cochlear implant users.
    Langereis MC; Bosman AJ; van Olphen AF; Smoorenburg GF
    Audiology; 1997; 36(5):279-97. PubMed ID: 9305524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Vowel confusion patterns in adults during initial 4 years of implant use.
    Välimaa TT; Sorri MJ; Laitakari J; Sivonen V; Muhli A
    Clin Linguist Phon; 2011 Feb; 25(2):121-44. PubMed ID: 21070135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Saliency of Vowel Features in Neural Responses of Cochlear Implant Users.
    Prévost F; Lehmann A
    Clin EEG Neurosci; 2018 Nov; 49(6):388-397. PubMed ID: 29690785
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The use of static and dynamic vowel cues by multichannel cochlear implant users.
    Kirk KI; Tye-Murray N; Hurtig RR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Jun; 91(6):3487-98. PubMed ID: 1619125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Modeling open-set spoken word recognition in postlingually deafened adults after cochlear implantation: some preliminary results with the neighborhood activation model.
    Meyer TA; Frisch SA; Pisoni DB; Miyamoto RT; Svirsky MA
    Otol Neurotol; 2003 Jul; 24(4):612-20. PubMed ID: 12851554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech production changes with the Nucleus 22-channel cochlear implant.
    Cummings S; Groenewald E; Coetzee L; Hugo R; Van Derlinde M
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep; 166():394-7. PubMed ID: 7668719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Vowel perception strategies of normal-hearing subjects and patients using Nucleus multichannel and 3M/House cochlear implants.
    Tartter VC; Hellman SA; Chute PM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Sep; 92(3):1269-83. PubMed ID: 1401515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Relations among different measures of speech reception in subjects using a cochlear implant.
    Rabinowitz WM; Eddington DK; Delhorne LA; Cuneo PA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Oct; 92(4 Pt 1):1869-81. PubMed ID: 1401531
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.