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 *

71 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20446821)

  • 1. Speech perception performance for 100 post-lingually deaf adults fitted with Neurelec cochlear implants: Comparison between Digisonic® Convex and Digisonic® SP devices after a 1-year follow-up.
    Lazard DS; Bordure P; Lina-Granade G; Magnan J; Meller R; Meyer B; Radafy E; Roux PE; Gnansia D; Péan V; Truy E
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2010 Nov; 130(11):1267-73. PubMed ID: 20446821
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Main peak interleaved sampling (MPIS) strategy: effect of stimulation rate variations on speech perception in adult cochlear implant recipients using the Digisonic SP cochlear implant.
    Di Lella F; Bacciu A; Pasanisi E; Vincenti V; Guida M; Bacciu S
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2010; 130(1):102-7. PubMed ID: 19424919
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Speech perception in congenitally, pre-lingually and post-lingually deaf children expressed in an equivalent hearing loss value.
    Rotteveel LJ; Snik AF; Vermeulen AM; Cremers CW; Mylanus EA
    Clin Otolaryngol; 2008 Dec; 33(6):560-9. PubMed ID: 19126130
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Horizontal-plane localization of noise and speech signals by postlingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants.
    Grantham DW; Ashmead DH; Ricketts TA; Labadie RF; Haynes DS
    Ear Hear; 2007 Aug; 28(4):524-41. PubMed ID: 17609614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. One-Year Follow Up of Auditory Performance in Post-Lingually Deafened Adults Implanted with the Neurelec Digisonic(®) SP/Saphyr(®) Neo Cochlear Implant System.
    Borger D; Lina-Granade G; Verneyre S; Thai-Van H; Saaï S; Hoen M; Gnansia D; Truy E
    Audiol Res; 2015 Jun; 5(2):139. PubMed ID: 26779331
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Subjective and objective results after bilateral cochlear implantation in adults.
    Laske RD; Veraguth D; Dillier N; Binkert A; Holzmann D; Huber AM
    Otol Neurotol; 2009 Apr; 30(3):313-8. PubMed ID: 19318885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Short-term results of Neurelec Digisonic SP cochlear implantation in prelingually deafened children.
    Senkal OA; Hizal E; Yavuz H; Yilmaz I; Ozluoglu LN
    Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2014 Jun; 271(6):1415-22. PubMed ID: 23749057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. [Speech discrimination in post-lingually deaf patients with cochlear implants].
    Gstoettner W; Adunka O; Hamzavi J; Lautischer M; Baumgartner WD
    Wien Klin Wochenschr; 2000 Jun; 112(11):487-91. PubMed ID: 10890126
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Analysis of the performance of post-lingually deafened patients with Nurotron(®) Venus™ cochlear implants.
    Li J; Ji F; Chen W; Zhao H; Han D; Yang S
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2014 Jun; 134(6):609-14. PubMed ID: 24720340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Performance of older adult cochlear implant users in Hong Kong.
    Chan V; Tong M; Yue V; Wong T; Leung E; Yuen K; van Hasselt A
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2 Suppl):52S-55S. PubMed ID: 17496647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of a tactile aid and a cochlear implant in one child.
    Hesketh LJ; Fryauf-Bertschy H; Osberger MJ
    Am J Otol; 1991; 12 Suppl():183-7. PubMed ID: 2069180
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Comparison of speech perception performance between Sprint/Esprit 3G and Freedom processors in children implanted with nucleus cochlear implants.
    Santarelli R; Magnavita V; De Filippi R; Ventura L; Genovese E; Arslan E
    Otol Neurotol; 2009 Apr; 30(3):304-12. PubMed ID: 19225440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Speech perception of children using Nucleus, Clarion or Med-El cochlear implants.
    Taitelbaum-Swead R; Kishon-Rabin L; Kaplan-Neeman R; Muchnik C; Kronenberg J; Hildesheimer M
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2005 Dec; 69(12):1675-83. PubMed ID: 15955572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Results with the currently used cochlear implant.
    Ito J; Takagi A; Kawano M; Takahashi H; Honjo I
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep; 166():298-300. PubMed ID: 7668678
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Cochlear implants in post-lingually deafened patients.
    Hiraumi H; Tsuji J; Kanemaru S; Fujino K; Ito J
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 2007 Feb; (557):17-21. PubMed ID: 17453437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. [Speech discrimination in noise for patients with cochlear implants].
    Hamzavi J; Adunka O; Baumgartner WD; Gstoettner W
    Wien Klin Wochenschr; 2000 Jun; 112(11):498-504. PubMed ID: 10890128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Cochlear implant hearing performance at the University of Minnesota.
    Kimberley BP; Lee A; Scheller L; Levine S; Adams G; Nelson DA
    J Otolaryngol; 1989 Feb; 18(1):24-7. PubMed ID: 2921782
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of FM-receiver gain on speech-recognition performance of adults with cochlear implants.
    Schafer EC; Wolfe J; Lawless T; Stout B
    Int J Audiol; 2009 Apr; 48(4):196-203. PubMed ID: 19363720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Evaluating the benefits of cochlear implants in an education setting.
    Geers AE; Moog JS
    Am J Otol; 1991; 12 Suppl():116-25. PubMed ID: 2069172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.