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.
2. Speech recognition with a CIS strategy for the ineraid multichannel cochlear implant. Boëx C; Pelizzone M; Montandon P Am J Otol; 1996 Jan; 17(1):61-8. PubMed ID: 8694136 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. New processing strategies in cochlear implantation. Wilson BS; Lawson DT; Zerbi M; Finley CC; Wolford RD Am J Otol; 1995 Sep; 16(5):669-75. PubMed ID: 8588675 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A novel speech-processing strategy incorporating tonal information for cochlear implants. Lan N; Nie KB; Gao SK; Zeng FG IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2004 May; 51(5):752-60. PubMed ID: 15132501 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. An investigation of input level range for the nucleus 24 cochlear implant system: speech perception performance, program preference, and loudness comfort ratings. James CJ; Skinner MW; Martin LF; Holden LK; Galvin KL; Holden TA; Whitford L Ear Hear; 2003 Apr; 24(2):157-74. PubMed ID: 12677112 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. [Considerations on the rehabilitation of the hearing in cochlear implant patients]. Amadori M; Pantano N; Cestaro A; Babighian G Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital; 1996 Aug; 16(4):324-33. PubMed ID: 9082826 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of two cochlear implant speech processors in better versus poorer performers. Cafarelli Dees D; George C; Stevenson F; Sheridan C; Haacke NP Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep; 166():258-60. PubMed ID: 7668660 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Speech discrimination via cochlear implants with two different digital speech processing strategies: preliminary results for 7 patients. Dillier N; Bögli H; Spillmann T Scand Audiol Suppl; 1993; 38():145-53. PubMed ID: 8153560 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Performance of subjects fit with the Advanced Bionics CII and Nucleus 3G cochlear implant devices. Spahr AJ; Dorman MF Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2004 May; 130(5):624-8. PubMed ID: 15148187 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Multichannel cochlear implantation: Utah-design. Parkin JL; Stewart BE Laryngoscope; 1988 Mar; 98(3):262-5. PubMed ID: 3343876 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Bilateral cochlear implants controlled by a single speech processor. Lawson DT; Wilson BS; Zerbi M; van den Honert C; Finley CC; Farmer JC; McElveen JT; Roush PA Am J Otol; 1998 Nov; 19(6):758-61. PubMed ID: 9831150 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparative studies of speech processing strategies for cochlear implants. Wilson BS; Finley CC; Farmer JC; Lawson DT; Weber BA; Wolford RD; Kenan PD; White MW; Merzenich MM; Schindler RA Laryngoscope; 1988 Oct; 98(10):1069-77. PubMed ID: 3172953 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Results of speech processor upgrade in a population of Veterans Affairs cochlear implant recipients. Cohen NL; Waltzman SB; Roland JT; Bromberg B; Cambron N; Gibbs L; Parkinson W; Snead C Am J Otol; 1997 Jul; 18(4):462-5. PubMed ID: 9233486 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Speech intelligibility as a function of the number of channels of stimulation for normal-hearing listeners and patients with cochlear implants. Dorman MF; Loizou PC Am J Otol; 1997 Nov; 18(6 Suppl):S113-4. PubMed ID: 9391623 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]