163 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18223447)
21. A new fine structure speech coding strategy: speech perception at a reduced number of channels.
Riss D; Arnoldner C; Baumgartner WD; Kaider A; Hamzavi JS
Otol Neurotol; 2008 Sep; 29(6):784-8. PubMed ID: 18667945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Clinical relevance of quality of life outcome in cochlear implantation in postlingually deafened adults.
Klop WM; Boermans PP; Ferrier MB; van den Hout WB; Stiggelbout AM; Frijns JH
Otol Neurotol; 2008 Aug; 29(5):615-21. PubMed ID: 18451751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. The impact of cochlear implantation on quality of life: the role of audiologic performance and variables.
Hirschfelder A; Gräbel S; Olze H
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2008 Mar; 138(3):357-62. PubMed ID: 18312885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Evaluation of the benefit for cochlear implantees of two assistive directional microphone systems in an artificial diffuse noise situation.
van der Beek FB; Soede W; Frijns JH
Ear Hear; 2007 Feb; 28(1):99-110. PubMed ID: 17204902
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Speech understanding in noise with the Roger Pen, Naida CI Q70 processor, and integrated Roger 17 receiver in a multi-talker network.
De Ceulaer G; Bestel J; Mülder HE; Goldbeck F; de Varebeke SP; Govaerts PJ
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2016 May; 273(5):1107-14. PubMed ID: 25983309
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Enhanced hearing in noise for cochlear implant recipients: clinical trial results for a commercially available speech-enhancement strategy.
Koch DB; Quick A; Osberger MJ; Saoji A; Litvak L
Otol Neurotol; 2014 Jun; 35(5):803-9. PubMed ID: 24691504
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Performance of the new Clarion speech processor 1.2 in quiet and in noise.
Battmer RD; Feldmeier I; Kohlenberg A; Lenarz T
Am J Otol; 1997 Nov; 18(6 Suppl):S144-6. PubMed ID: 9391637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. 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]
30. The family oriented musical training for children with cochlear implants: speech and musical perception results of two year follow-up.
Yucel E; Sennaroglu G; Belgin E
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2009 Jul; 73(7):1043-52. PubMed ID: 19411117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Outcomes of treatment of partial deafness with cochlear implantation: a DUET study.
Lorens A; Polak M; Piotrowska A; Skarzynski H
Laryngoscope; 2008 Feb; 118(2):288-94. PubMed ID: 18000465
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Cochlear implant outcomes and quality of life in adults with prelingual deafness.
Klop WM; Briaire JJ; Stiggelbout AM; Frijns JH
Laryngoscope; 2007 Nov; 117(11):1982-7. PubMed ID: 17767086
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. FS4, FS4-p, and FSP: a 4-month crossover study of 3 fine structure sound-coding strategies.
Riss D; Hamzavi JS; Blineder M; Honeder C; Ehrenreich I; Kaider A; Baumgartner WD; Gstoettner W; Arnoldner C
Ear Hear; 2014; 35(6):e272-81. PubMed ID: 25127325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Clinical evaluation of expanded input dynamic range in Nucleus cochlear implants.
Dawson PW; Vandali AE; Knight MR; Heasman JM
Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):163-76. PubMed ID: 17496668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Within-subjects comparison of the HiRes and Fidelity120 speech processing strategies: speech perception and its relation to place-pitch sensitivity.
Donaldson GS; Dawson PK; Borden LZ
Ear Hear; 2011; 32(2):238-50. PubMed ID: 21084987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Speech recognition in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of standard HiRes and HiRes 120 sound processing.
Firszt JB; Holden LK; Reeder RM; Skinner MW
Otol Neurotol; 2009 Feb; 30(2):146-52. PubMed ID: 19106769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Long-term improvement of speech perception with the fine structure processing coding strategy in cochlear implants.
Kleine Punte A; De Bodt M; Van de Heyning P
ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec; 2014; 76(1):36-43. PubMed ID: 24685836
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Japanese-language results for the speak strategy from Cochlear Pty Limited.
Funasaka S; Shiroma M; Yukawa K
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep; 166():265-8. PubMed ID: 7668663
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Speech performance and sound localization in a complex noisy environment in bilaterally implanted adult patients.
Mosnier I; Sterkers O; Bebear JP; Godey B; Robier A; Deguine O; Fraysse B; Bordure P; Mondain M; Bouccara D; Bozorg-Grayeli A; Borel S; Ambert-Dahan E; Ferrary E
Audiol Neurootol; 2009; 14(2):106-14. PubMed ID: 18832816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. What matched comparisons can and cannot tell us: the case of cochlear implants.
Sagi E; Fitzgerald MB; Svirsky MA
Ear Hear; 2007 Aug; 28(4):571-9. PubMed ID: 17609617
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
