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 *

128 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21476674)

  • 1. A mathematical model of medial consonant identification by cochlear implant users.
    Svirsky MA; Sagi E; Meyer TA; Kaiser AR; Teoh SW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Apr; 129(4):2191-200. PubMed ID: 21476674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effects of vowel context on the recognition of initial and medial consonants by cochlear implant users.
    Donaldson GS; Kreft HA
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):658-77. PubMed ID: 17086077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Modeling open-set spoken word recognition in postlingually deafened adults after cochlear implantation: some preliminary results with the neighborhood activation model.
    Meyer TA; Frisch SA; Pisoni DB; Miyamoto RT; Svirsky MA
    Otol Neurotol; 2003 Jul; 24(4):612-20. PubMed ID: 12851554
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Acoustic and electrical pattern analysis of consonant perceptual cues used by cochlear implant users.
    Teoh SW; Neuburger HS; Svirsky MA
    Audiol Neurootol; 2003; 8(5):269-85. PubMed ID: 12904682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Temporal cues for consonant recognition: training, talker generalization, and use in evaluation of cochlear implants.
    Van Tasell DJ; Greenfield DG; Logemann JJ; Nelson DA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Sep; 92(3):1247-57. PubMed ID: 1401513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Place-pitch sensitivity and its relation to consonant recognition by cochlear implant listeners using the MPEAK and SPEAK speech processing strategies.
    Donaldson GS; Nelson DA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 Mar; 107(3):1645-58. PubMed ID: 10738818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Amplitude Modulation Detection and Speech Recognition in Late-Implanted Prelingually and Postlingually Deafened Cochlear Implant Users.
    De Ruiter AM; Debruyne JA; Chenault MN; Francart T; Brokx JP
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(5):557-66. PubMed ID: 25851075
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Consonant and Vowel Identification in Cochlear Implant Users Measured by Nonsense Words: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
    Rødvik AK; von Koss Torkildsen J; Wie OB; Storaker MA; Silvola JT
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2018 Apr; 61(4):1023-1050. PubMed ID: 29623340
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Cross-frequency integration for consonant and vowel identification in bimodal hearing.
    Kong YY; Braida LD
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2011 Jun; 54(3):959-80. PubMed ID: 21060139
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Patterns of phoneme perception errors by listeners with cochlear implants as a function of overall speech perception ability.
    Munson B; Donaldson GS; Allen SL; Collison EA; Nelson DA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Feb; 113(2):925-35. PubMed ID: 12597186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Vowel and consonant recognition with the aid of a multichannel cochlear implant.
    Dorman MF; Dankowski K; McCandless G; Parkin JL; Smith L
    Q J Exp Psychol A; 1991 Aug; 43(3):585-601. PubMed ID: 1775658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Assessment of Spectral and Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users Using Psychoacoustic Discrimination and Speech Cue Categorization.
    Winn MB; Won JH; Moon IJ
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(6):e377-e390. PubMed ID: 27438871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effects of electrode location and spacing on phoneme recognition with the Nucleus-22 cochlear implant.
    Fu QJ; Shannon RV
    Ear Hear; 1999 Aug; 20(4):321-31. PubMed ID: 10466568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Timbre and speech perception in bimodal and bilateral cochlear-implant listeners.
    Kong YY; Mullangi A; Marozeau J
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(5):645-59. PubMed ID: 22677814
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Within-subjects comparison of the HiRes and Fidelity120 speech processing strategies: speech perception and its relation to place-pitch sensitivity.
    Donaldson GS; Dawson PK; Borden LZ
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(2):238-50. PubMed ID: 21084987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Behavioral Measures of Temporal Processing and Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users.
    Blankenship C; Zhang F; Keith R
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 Oct; 27(9):701-713. PubMed ID: 27718347
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Vowel and consonant identification tests can be used to compare performances in a multilingual group of cochlear implant patients.
    Pelizzone M; Boëx C; Montandon P
    ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec; 1993; 55(6):341-6. PubMed ID: 8265119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Low-pass filtering in amplitude modulation detection associated with vowel and consonant identification in subjects with cochlear implants.
    Cazals Y; Pelizzone M; Saudan O; Boex C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1994 Oct; 96(4):2048-54. PubMed ID: 7963020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Auditory consonant and word recognition skills of cochlear implant users.
    Tye-Murray N; Tyler RS
    Ear Hear; 1989 Oct; 10(5):292-8. PubMed ID: 2792582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.