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 *

178 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21117760)

  • 1. Temporal pitch perception at high rates in cochlear implants.
    Kong YY; Carlyon RP
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 May; 127(5):3114-23. PubMed ID: 21117760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Electric-acoustic pitch comparisons in single-sided-deaf cochlear implant users: frequency-place functions and rate pitch.
    Schatzer R; Vermeire K; Visser D; Krenmayr A; Kals M; Voormolen M; Van de Heyning P; Zierhofer C
    Hear Res; 2014 Mar; 309():26-35. PubMed ID: 24252455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Detection of acoustic temporal fine structure by cochlear implant listeners: behavioral results and computational modeling.
    Imennov NS; Won JH; Drennan WR; Jameyson E; Rubinstein JT
    Hear Res; 2013 Apr; 298():60-72. PubMed ID: 23333260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Contour identification with pitch and loudness cues using cochlear implants.
    Luo X; Masterson ME; Wu CC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):EL8-14. PubMed ID: 24437857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of pulse shape on pitch sensitivity of cochlear implant users.
    Arslan NO; Luo X
    Hear Res; 2024 Sep; 450():109075. PubMed ID: 38986164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A cochlear implant user with exceptional musical hearing ability.
    Maarefvand M; Marozeau J; Blamey PJ
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Jun; 52(6):424-32. PubMed ID: 23509878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effect of mismatched place-of-stimulation on binaural fusion and lateralization in bilateral cochlear-implant users.
    Kan A; Stoelb C; Litovsky RY; Goupell MJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct; 134(4):2923-36. PubMed ID: 24116428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Stream segregation on a single electrode as a function of pulse rate in cochlear implant listeners.
    Duran SI; Collins LM; Throckmorton CS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Dec; 132(6):3849-55. PubMed ID: 23231115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Voice gender discrimination provides a measure of more than pitch-related perception in cochlear implant users.
    Li T; Fu QJ
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Aug; 50(8):498-502. PubMed ID: 21696330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Characterizing the relationship between modulation sensitivity and pitch resolution in cochlear implant users.
    Camarena A; Goldsworthy RL
    Hear Res; 2024 Jul; 448():109026. PubMed ID: 38776706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Detection and rate discrimination of amplitude modulation in electrical hearing.
    Chatterjee M; Oberzut C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1567-80. PubMed ID: 21895095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Rate and onset cues can improve cochlear implant synthetic vowel recognition in noise.
    Mc Laughlin M; Reilly RB; Zeng FG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1546-60. PubMed ID: 23464025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Musical pitch and lexical tone perception with cochlear implants.
    Wang W; Zhou N; Xu L
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Apr; 50(4):270-8. PubMed ID: 21190394
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Assessing the role of spectral and intensity cues in spectral ripple detection and discrimination in cochlear-implant users.
    Anderson ES; Oxenham AJ; Nelson PB; Nelson DA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Dec; 132(6):3925-34. PubMed ID: 23231122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effect of stimulus level and place of stimulation on temporal pitch perception by cochlear implant users.
    Carlyon RP; Lynch C; Deeks JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 May; 127(5):2997-3008. PubMed ID: 21117749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Evidence of across-channel processing for spectral-ripple discrimination in cochlear implant listeners.
    Won JH; Jones GL; Drennan WR; Jameyson EM; Rubinstein JT
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Oct; 130(4):2088-97. PubMed ID: 21973363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Psychoacoustic and phoneme identification measures in cochlear-implant and normal-hearing listeners.
    Goldsworthy RL; Delhorne LA; Braida LD; Reed CM
    Trends Amplif; 2013 Mar; 17(1):27-44. PubMed ID: 23429419
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Spatial hearing benefits demonstrated with presentation of acoustic temporal fine structure cues in bilateral cochlear implant listeners.
    Churchill TH; Kan A; Goupell MJ; Litovsky RY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Sep; 136(3):1246. PubMed ID: 25190398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The ability of cochlear implant users to use temporal envelope cues recovered from speech frequency modulation.
    Won JH; Lorenzi C; Nie K; Li X; Jameyson EM; Drennan WR; Rubinstein JT
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):1113-9. PubMed ID: 22894230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Dynamic current steering with phantom electrode in cochlear implants.
    Luo X; Garrett C
    Hear Res; 2020 May; 390():107949. PubMed ID: 32200300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.