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 *

112 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17260865)

  • 21. New cochlear implant coding strategy for tonal language speakers.
    Wong LL; Vandali AE; Ciocca V; Luk B; Ip VW; Murray B; Yu HC; Chung I
    Int J Audiol; 2008 Jun; 47(6):337-47. PubMed ID: 18569106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Use of S-shaped input-output functions for noise suppression in cochlear implants.
    Kasturi K; Loizou PC
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):402-11. PubMed ID: 17485989
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Improved perception of music with a harmonic based algorithm for cochlear implants.
    Li X; Nie K; Imennov NS; Rubinstein JT; Atlas LE
    IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng; 2013 Jul; 21(4):684-94. PubMed ID: 23613083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [Study on the effect of spectral details encoding in speech processing on Mandarin recognition for cochlear implants users with speech maskers].
    Guan T; Xu T; Ye D
    Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi; 2008 Apr; 25(2):435-8. PubMed ID: 18610637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Speech intelligibility in cochlear implant simulations: Effects of carrier type, interfering noise, and subject experience.
    Whitmal NA; Poissant SF; Freyman RL; Helfer KS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Oct; 122(4):2376-88. PubMed ID: 17902872
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. SVD-based optimal filtering for noise reduction in dual microphone hearing aids: a real time implementation and perceptual evaluation.
    Maj JB; Royackers L; Moonen M; Wouters J
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2005 Sep; 52(9):1563-73. PubMed ID: 16189969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. On normalized MSE analysis of speech fundamental frequency in the cochlear implant-like spectrally reduced speech.
    Do CT; Pastor D; Goalic A
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2010 Mar; 57(3):572-7. PubMed ID: 19744908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. A neural network model for optimizing vowel recognition by cochlear implant listeners.
    Chang CH; Anderson GT; Loizou PC
    IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng; 2001 Mar; 9(1):42-8. PubMed ID: 11482362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Using genetic algorithms with subjective input from human subjects: implications for fitting hearing aids and cochlear implants.
    Başkent D; Eiler CL; Edwards B
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):370-80. PubMed ID: 17485986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Neuroprosthetic hearing with auditory brainstem implants.
    Kuchta J
    Biomed Tech (Berl); 2004 Apr; 49(4):83-7. PubMed ID: 15171587
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Wearable digital speech processor for cochlear implants using a TMS320C25.
    Dillier N; Senn C; Schlatter T; Stöckli M; Utzinger U
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():120-7. PubMed ID: 2356719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Development of a real time sparse non-negative matrix factorization module for cochlear implants by using xPC target.
    Hu H; Krasoulis A; Lutman M; Bleeck S
    Sensors (Basel); 2013 Oct; 13(10):13861-78. PubMed ID: 24129021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Effects of cochlear implant processing and fundamental frequency on the intelligibility of competing sentences.
    Stickney GS; Assmann PF; Chang J; Zeng FG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Aug; 122(2):1069-78. PubMed ID: 17672654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Results from a psychoacoustic model-based strategy for the nucleus-24 and freedom cochlear implants.
    Büchner A; Nogueira W; Edler B; Battmer RD; Lenarz T
    Otol Neurotol; 2008 Feb; 29(2):189-92. PubMed ID: 18223445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Mandarin Chinese tone identification in cochlear implants: predictions from acoustic models.
    Morton KD; Torrione PA; Throckmorton CS; Collins LM
    Hear Res; 2008 Oct; 244(1-2):66-76. PubMed ID: 18706497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Real-time automatic switching between noise suppression algorithms for deployment in cochlear implants.
    Gopalakrishna V; Kehtarnavaz N; Loizou PC; Panahi I
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2010; 2010():863-6. PubMed ID: 21097196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. The benefits of remote microphone technology for adults with cochlear implants.
    Fitzpatrick EM; Séguin C; Schramm DR; Armstrong S; Chénier J
    Ear Hear; 2009 Oct; 30(5):590-9. PubMed ID: 19561509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. A versatile system for the generation and the development of speech coding strategies in cochlear implants.
    Tönder N; Hartmann R; Klinke R
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 1998 Jun; 45(6):773-82. PubMed ID: 9609942
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Approximated affine projection algorithm for feedback cancellation in hearing aids.
    Lee S; Kim IY; Park YC
    Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2007 Sep; 87(3):254-61. PubMed ID: 17644214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. [Asynchronous sequential stimulation. A new signal treatment for cochlear implants].
    Pean V; Ouayoun M; Genin J; Bachelot G; Fugain C; Meyer B; Chouard CH
    Ann Otolaryngol Chir Cervicofac; 1997; 114(5):184-90. PubMed ID: 9686029
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.