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 *

117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22074015)

  • 21. Combined electric acoustic stimulation with the PULSARCI(100) implant system using the FLEX(EAS) electrode array.
    Helbig S; Van de Heyning P; Kiefer J; Baumann U; Kleine-Punte A; Brockmeier H; Anderson I; Gstoettner W
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2011 Jun; 131(6):585-95. PubMed ID: 21281057
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Clinical evaluation of higher stimulation rates in the nucleus research platform 8 system.
    Plant K; Holden L; Skinner M; Arcaroli J; Whitford L; Law MA; Nel E
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):381-93. PubMed ID: 17485987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Tone perception results with Harmony and HiRes 120 in Cantonese-speaking subjects.
    Lee KY; Luk BP; Wong TK; Tong MC; Van Hasselt CA
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2009; 10 Suppl 1():68-73. PubMed ID: 19156707
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Speech recognition with a CIS strategy for the ineraid multichannel cochlear implant.
    Boëx C; Pelizzone M; Montandon P
    Am J Otol; 1996 Jan; 17(1):61-8. PubMed ID: 8694136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Noise signal reduction in cochlear implant speech processors].
    Müller-Deile J
    HNO; 1995 Sep; 43(9):545-51. PubMed ID: 7591867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Results of a pilot study with a signal enhancement algorithm for HiRes 120 cochlear implant users.
    Buechner A; Brendel M; Saalfeld H; Litvak L; Frohne-Buechner C; Lenarz T
    Otol Neurotol; 2010 Dec; 31(9):1386-90. PubMed ID: 20856160
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The family oriented musical training for children with cochlear implants: speech and musical perception results of two year follow-up.
    Yucel E; Sennaroglu G; Belgin E
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2009 Jul; 73(7):1043-52. PubMed ID: 19411117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Clinical relevance of quality of life outcome in cochlear implantation in postlingually deafened adults.
    Klop WM; Boermans PP; Ferrier MB; van den Hout WB; Stiggelbout AM; Frijns JH
    Otol Neurotol; 2008 Aug; 29(5):615-21. PubMed ID: 18451751
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Speech and music perception with the new fine structure speech coding strategy: preliminary results.
    Arnoldner C; Riss D; Brunner M; Durisin M; Baumgartner WD; Hamzavi JS
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2007 Dec; 127(12):1298-303. PubMed ID: 17851892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Long-term improvement of speech perception with the fine structure processing coding strategy in cochlear implants.
    Kleine Punte A; De Bodt M; Van de Heyning P
    ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec; 2014; 76(1):36-43. PubMed ID: 24685836
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The benefits of remote microphone technology for adults with cochlear implants.
    Fitzpatrick EM; Séguin C; Schramm DR; Armstrong S; Chénier J
    Ear Hear; 2009 Oct; 30(5):590-9. PubMed ID: 19561509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Intra-individual assessment of speech and music perception in cochlear implant users with contralateral Cochlear™ and MED-EL™ systems.
    Harris RL; Gibson WP; Johnson M; Brew J; Bray M; Psarros C
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2011 Dec; 131(12):1270-8. PubMed ID: 22074105
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Comparison of the body-worn CIS-PRO + and the behind-the-ear-worn TEMPO + cochlear implant systems in Finnish-speaking adult CI users: any differences in results with experienced listeners?
    Välimaa TT; Löppönen HJ
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2008 Sep; 128(9):984-91. PubMed ID: 19086195
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Speech intelligibility as a predictor of cochlear implant outcome in prelingually deafened adults.
    van Dijkhuizen JN; Beers M; Boermans PP; Briaire JJ; Frijns JH
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(4):445-58. PubMed ID: 21258238
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Multicentre evaluation of music perception in adult users of Advanced Bionics cochlear implants.
    Adams D; Ajimsha KM; Barberá MT; Gazibegovic D; Gisbert J; Gómez J; Raveh E; Rocca C; Romanet P; Seebens Y; Zarowski A
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2014 Jan; 15(1):20-6. PubMed ID: 24074504
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. The Vienna cochlear implant program.
    Burian K; Hochmair-Desoyer IJ; Eisenwort B
    Otolaryngol Clin North Am; 1986 May; 19(2):313-28. PubMed ID: 3754952
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. [How does a cochlear implant speech processor work?].
    Adunka O; Kiefer J
    Laryngorhinootologie; 2005 Nov; 84(11):841-50; quiz 851-4. PubMed ID: 16358193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Comparison of speech processing strategies used in the Clarion implant processor.
    Loizou PC; Stickney G; Mishra L; Assmann P
    Ear Hear; 2003 Feb; 24(1):12-9. PubMed ID: 12598809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Effects of converting bilateral cochlear implant subjects to a strategy with increased rate and number of channels.
    Dunn CC; Tyler RS; Witt SA; Gantz BJ
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 2006 Jun; 115(6):425-32. PubMed ID: 16805373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Performance of the new Clarion speech processor 1.2 in quiet and in noise.
    Battmer RD; Feldmeier I; Kohlenberg A; Lenarz T
    Am J Otol; 1997 Nov; 18(6 Suppl):S144-6. PubMed ID: 9391637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.