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 *

150 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18247772)

  • 1. Within- and across-channel gap detection in cochlear implant listeners.
    Grose JH; Buss E
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Dec; 122(6):3651-8. PubMed ID: 18247772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Spectral and temporal cues in cochlear implant speech perception.
    Nie K; Barco A; Zeng FG
    Ear Hear; 2006 Apr; 27(2):208-17. PubMed ID: 16518146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of programming threshold and maplaw settings on acoustic thresholds and speech discrimination with the MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implant.
    Boyd PJ
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):608-18. PubMed ID: 17086073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Development of a large-item environmental sound test and the effects of short-term training with spectrally-degraded stimuli.
    Shafiro V
    Ear Hear; 2008 Oct; 29(5):775-90. PubMed ID: 18596641
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of the fine structure processing (FSP) strategy and the CIS strategy used in the MED-EL cochlear implant system: speech intelligibility and music sound quality.
    Magnusson L
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Apr; 50(4):279-87. PubMed ID: 21190508
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of age and hearing loss on gap detection and the precedence effect: narrow-band stimuli.
    Lister JJ; Roberts RA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2005 Apr; 48(2):482-93. PubMed ID: 15989406
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Results with a cochlear implant channel-picking strategy based on "Selected Groups".
    Kals M; Schatzer R; Krenmayr A; Vermeire K; Visser D; Bader P; Neustetter C; Zangerl M; Zierhofer C
    Hear Res; 2010 Feb; 260(1-2):63-9. PubMed ID: 19944138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Duration discrimination in listeners with cochlear hearing loss: effects of stimulus type and frequency.
    Grose JH; Hall JW; Buss E
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2004 Feb; 47(1):5-12. PubMed ID: 15072523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The adaptive pattern of the late auditory evoked potential elicited by repeated stimuli in cochlear implant users.
    Zhang F; Anderson J; Samy R; Houston L
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Apr; 49(4):277-85. PubMed ID: 20151878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The cochlear implant electrode-pitch function.
    Baumann U; Nobbe A
    Hear Res; 2006 Mar; 213(1-2):34-42. PubMed ID: 16442249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The psychoacoustics of profound hearing impairment.
    Rosen S; Faulkner A; Smith DA
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():16-22. PubMed ID: 2356723
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Interaural time and level difference thresholds for acoustically presented signals in post-lingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants using CIS+ processing.
    Grantham DW; Ashmead DH; Ricketts TA; Haynes DS; Labadie RF
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jan; 29(1):33-44. PubMed ID: 18091105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. A music quality rating test battery for cochlear implant users to compare the FSP and HDCIS strategies for music appreciation.
    Looi V; Winter P; Anderson I; Sucher C
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Aug; 50(8):503-18. PubMed ID: 21689048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Identification of environmental sounds with varying spectral resolution.
    Shafiro V
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):401-20. PubMed ID: 18344871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Experiences of the use of FOX, an intelligent agent, for programming cochlear implant sound processors in new users.
    Vaerenberg B; Govaerts PJ; de Ceulaer G; Daemers K; Schauwers K
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Jan; 50(1):50-8. PubMed ID: 21091083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effect of age on silent gap discrimination in synthetic speech stimuli.
    Lister J; Tarver K
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2004 Apr; 47(2):257-68. PubMed ID: 15157128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Binaural interference in bilateral cochlear-implant listeners.
    Best V; Laback B; Majdak P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Nov; 130(5):2939-50. PubMed ID: 22087922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Spectral modulation detection and vowel and consonant identifications in cochlear implant listeners.
    Saoji AA; Litvak L; Spahr AJ; Eddins DA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2009 Sep; 126(3):955-8. PubMed ID: 19739707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Electrical field imaging as a means to predict the loudness of monopolar and tripolar stimuli in cochlear implant patients.
    Berenstein CK; Vanpoucke FJ; Mulder JJ; Mens LH
    Hear Res; 2010 Dec; 270(1-2):28-38. PubMed ID: 20946945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of Electroaudiometry with cochlear implant in children with inner ear anomaly.
    Takanami T; Ito K; Yamasoba T; Kaga K
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2009 Jan; 73(1):153-8. PubMed ID: 19042035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.