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 *

179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19955721)

  • 21. The benefits of combining acoustic and electric stimulation for the recognition of speech, voice and melodies.
    Dorman MF; Gifford RH; Spahr AJ; McKarns SA
    Audiol Neurootol; 2008; 13(2):105-12. PubMed ID: 18057874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Long-term follow-up of hearing preservation in electric-acoustic stimulation patients.
    Mertens G; Punte AK; Cochet E; De Bodt M; Van de Heyning P
    Otol Neurotol; 2014 Dec; 35(10):1765-72. PubMed ID: 25133472
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Hybrid Music Perception Outcomes: Implications for Melody and Timbre Recognition in Cochlear Implant Recipients.
    Parkinson AJ; Rubinstein JT; Drennan WR; Dodson C; Nie K
    Otol Neurotol; 2019 Mar; 40(3):e283-e289. PubMed ID: 30741908
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Differences in Perception of Musical Stimuli among Acoustic, Electric, and Combined Modality Listeners.
    Prentiss SM; Friedland DR; Nash JJ; Runge CL
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 May; 26(5):494-501. PubMed ID: 26055838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Effects of hearing aid settings for electric-acoustic stimulation.
    Dillon MT; Buss E; Pillsbury HC; Adunka OF; Buchman CA; Adunka MC
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2014 Feb; 25(2):133-40. PubMed ID: 24828214
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Effect of speech degradation on top-down repair: phonemic restoration with simulations of cochlear implants and combined electric-acoustic stimulation.
    Başkent D
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2012 Oct; 13(5):683-92. PubMed ID: 22569838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Improved speech reception and sound quality with the DUET2 audio processor for electric acoustic stimulation.
    Kleine Punte A; Mertens G; Cochet E; De Bodt M; Van de Heyning P
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2015; 135(10):1022-9. PubMed ID: 26073650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Trimodal speech perception: how residual acoustic hearing supplements cochlear-implant consonant recognition in the presence of visual cues.
    Sheffield BM; Schuchman G; Bernstein JG
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(3):e99-112. PubMed ID: 25514796
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. How much residual hearing is 'useful' for music perception with cochlear implants?
    El Fata F; James CJ; Laborde ML; Fraysse B
    Audiol Neurootol; 2009; 14 Suppl 1():14-21. PubMed ID: 19390171
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Speech recognition in noise for cochlear implant listeners: benefits of residual acoustic hearing.
    Turner CW; Gantz BJ; Vidal C; Behrens A; Henry BA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 Apr; 115(4):1729-35. PubMed ID: 15101651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Electric-acoustic forward masking in cochlear implant users with ipsilateral residual hearing.
    Imsiecke M; Krüger B; Büchner A; Lenarz T; Nogueira W
    Hear Res; 2018 Jul; 364():25-37. PubMed ID: 29673567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Bilateral electric acoustic stimulation: a comparison of partial and deep cochlear electrode insertion. A longitudinal case study.
    Kleine Punte A; Vermeire K; Van de Heyning P
    Adv Otorhinolaryngol; 2010; 67():144-152. PubMed ID: 19955731
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. THE PSYCHOPHYSICS OF LOW-FREQUENCY ACOUSTIC HEARING IN ELECTRIC AND ACOUSTIC STIMULATION (EAS) AND BIMODAL PATIENTS.
    Gifford RH; Dorman MF
    J Hear Sci; 2012 May; 2(2):33-44. PubMed ID: 24244874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Simultaneous masking between electric and acoustic stimulation in cochlear implant users with residual low-frequency hearing.
    Krüger B; Büchner A; Nogueira W
    Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 353():185-196. PubMed ID: 28688755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Electric acoustic stimulation: a new era in prosthetic hearing rehabilitation.
    Van de Heyning P; Kleine Punte A
    Adv Otorhinolaryngol; 2010; 67():1-5. PubMed ID: 19955716
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Speech perception in individuals with auditory neuropathy.
    Zeng FG; Liu S
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Apr; 49(2):367-80. PubMed ID: 16671850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Impact of Electric Stimulation on Residual Hearing.
    Dillon MT; Bucker AL; Adunka MC; King ER; Adunka OF; Buchman CA; Pillsbury HC
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Sep; 26(8):732-740. PubMed ID: 26333881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Standard cochlear implantation of adults with residual low-frequency hearing: implications for combined electro-acoustic stimulation.
    Novak MA; Black JM; Koch DB
    Otol Neurotol; 2007 Aug; 28(5):609-14. PubMed ID: 17514064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Psychoacoustic and electrophysiological electric-acoustic interaction effects in cochlear implant users with ipsilateral residual hearing.
    Imsiecke M; Büchner A; Lenarz T; Nogueira W
    Hear Res; 2020 Feb; 386():107873. PubMed ID: 31884220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Combining acoustic and electrical speech processing: Iowa/Nucleus hybrid implant.
    Gantz BJ; Turner C
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2004 May; 124(4):344-7. PubMed ID: 15224850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.