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 *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16642841)

  • 1. Sensitivity to isolated and concurrent intensity and fundamental frequency increments by cochlear implant users under natural listening conditions.
    Rogers CF; Healy EW; Montgomery AA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Apr; 119(4):2276-87. PubMed ID: 16642841
    [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. Effects of age on F0 discrimination and intonation perception in simulated electric and electroacoustic hearing.
    Souza P; Arehart K; Miller CW; Muralimanohar RK
    Ear Hear; 2011 Feb; 32(1):75-83. PubMed ID: 20739892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Processing F0 with cochlear implants: Modulation frequency discrimination and speech intonation recognition.
    Chatterjee M; Peng SC
    Hear Res; 2008 Jan; 235(1-2):143-56. PubMed ID: 18093766
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants.
    Friesen LM; Shannon RV; Baskent D; Wang X
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Aug; 110(2):1150-63. PubMed ID: 11519582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants.
    van Hoesel RJ; Tyler RS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Mar; 113(3):1617-30. PubMed ID: 12656396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Training of cochlear implant users to improve pitch perception in the presence of competing place cues.
    Vandali A; Sly D; Cowan R; van Hoesel R
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(2):e1-e13. PubMed ID: 25329372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Fitting prelingually deafened adult cochlear implant users based on electrode discrimination performance.
    Debruyne JA; Francart T; Janssen AM; Douma K; Brokx JP
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Mar; 56(3):174-185. PubMed ID: 27758152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Better place-coding of the fundamental frequency in cochlear implants.
    Geurts L; Wouters J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 Feb; 115(2):844-52. PubMed ID: 15000196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Discrimination of Voice Pitch and Vocal-Tract Length in Cochlear Implant Users.
    Gaudrain E; Başkent D
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(2):226-237. PubMed ID: 28799983
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Perception of vowels and prosody by cochlear implant recipients in noise.
    Van Zyl M; Hanekom JJ
    J Commun Disord; 2013; 46(5-6):449-64. PubMed ID: 24157128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Speech perception with combined electric-acoustic stimulation and bilateral cochlear implants in a multisource noise field.
    Rader T; Fastl H; Baumann U
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):324-32. PubMed ID: 23263408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Spectro-temporal cues enhance modulation sensitivity in cochlear implant users.
    Zheng Y; Escabí M; Litovsky RY
    Hear Res; 2017 Aug; 351():45-54. PubMed ID: 28601530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The perception of prosody and speaker gender in normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant recipients.
    Meister H; Landwehr M; Pyschny V; Walger M; von Wedel H
    Int J Audiol; 2009 Jan; 48(1):38-48. PubMed ID: 19173112
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Using speech sounds to test functional spectral resolution in listeners with cochlear implants.
    Winn MB; Litovsky RY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Mar; 137(3):1430-42. PubMed ID: 25786954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The perception of sentence stress in cochlear implant recipients.
    Meister H; Landwehr M; Pyschny V; Wagner P; Walger M
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(4):459-67. PubMed ID: 21187749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Fundamental frequency information for speech recognition via bimodal stimulation: cochlear implant in one ear and hearing aid in the other.
    Shpak T; Most T; Luntz M
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(1):97-109. PubMed ID: 24141594
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.