326 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21696329)
1. The relationship between binaural benefit and difference in unilateral speech recognition performance for bilateral cochlear implant users.
Yoon YS; Li Y; Kang HY; Fu QJ
Int J Audiol; 2011 Aug; 50(8):554-65. PubMed ID: 21696329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Benefits of bilateral electrical stimulation with the nucleus cochlear implant in adults: 6-month postoperative results.
Laszig R; Aschendorff A; Stecker M; Müller-Deile J; Maune S; Dillier N; Weber B; Hey M; Begall K; Lenarz T; Battmer RD; Böhm M; Steffens T; Strutz J; Linder T; Probst R; Allum J; Westhofen M; Doering W
Otol Neurotol; 2004 Nov; 25(6):958-68. PubMed ID: 15547426
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Binaural cue sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients with acoustic hearing preservation.
Gifford RH; Stecker GC
Hear Res; 2020 May; 390():107929. PubMed ID: 32182551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Binaural advantages in users of bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant devices.
Kokkinakis K; Pak N
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):EL47-53. PubMed ID: 24437856
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Masking release with changing fundamental frequency: Electric acoustic stimulation resembles normal hearing subjects.
Auinger AB; Riss D; Liepins R; Rader T; Keck T; Keintzel T; Kaider A; Baumgartner WD; Gstoettner W; Arnoldner C
Hear Res; 2017 Jul; 350():226-234. PubMed ID: 28527538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Bilateral Versus Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adult Listeners: Speech-On-Speech Masking and Multitalker Localization.
Rana B; Buchholz JM; Morgan C; Sharma M; Weller T; Konganda SA; Shirai K; Kawano A
Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517722106. PubMed ID: 28752811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation in adults: a multicenter clinical study.
Litovsky R; Parkinson A; Arcaroli J; Sammeth C
Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):714-31. PubMed ID: 17086081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Avoiding disconnection: An evaluation of telephone options for cochlear implant users.
Marcrum SC; Picou EM; Steffens T
Int J Audiol; 2017 Mar; 56(3):186-193. PubMed ID: 27809627
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Adjustments of the amplitude mapping function: Sensitivity of cochlear implant users and effects on subjective preference and speech recognition.
Theelen-van den Hoek FL; Boymans M; van Dijk B; Dreschler WA
Int J Audiol; 2016 Nov; 55(11):674-87. PubMed ID: 27447758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Amplitude-mapping effects on speech intelligibility with unilateral and bilateral cochlear implants.
van Hoesel R; Böhm M; Battmer RD; Beckschebe J; Lenarz T
Ear Hear; 2005 Aug; 26(4):381-8. PubMed ID: 16079633
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Factors constraining the benefit to speech understanding of combining information from low-frequency hearing and a cochlear implant.
Dorman MF; Cook S; Spahr A; Zhang T; Loiselle L; Schramm D; Whittingham J; Gifford R
Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 322():107-11. PubMed ID: 25285624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Comparison of two channel selection criteria for noise suppression in cochlear implants.
Hazrati O; Loizou PC
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1615-24. PubMed ID: 23464031
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Utility of bilateral acoustic hearing in combination with electrical stimulation provided by the cochlear implant.
Plant K; Babic L
Int J Audiol; 2016; 55 Suppl 2():S31-8. PubMed ID: 26987051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Fundamental frequency is critical to speech perception in noise in combined acoustic and electric hearing.
Carroll J; Tiaden S; Zeng FG
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Oct; 130(4):2054-62. PubMed ID: 21973360
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Multi-microphone adaptive noise reduction strategies for coordinated stimulation in bilateral cochlear implant devices.
Kokkinakis K; Loizou PC
J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 May; 127(5):3136-44. PubMed ID: 21117762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The impact of reverberant self-masking and overlap-masking effects on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners (L).
Kokkinakis K; Loizou PC
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1099-102. PubMed ID: 21895052
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Factors influencing speech perception in noise for 5-year-old children using hearing aids or cochlear implants.
Ching TY; Zhang VW; Flynn C; Burns L; Button L; Hou S; McGhie K; Van Buynder P
Int J Audiol; 2018 May; 57(sup2):S70-S80. PubMed ID: 28687057
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
