253 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22215451)
21. Mismatch negativity (MMN) objectively reflects timbre discrimination thresholds in normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users.
Rahne T; Plontke SK; Wagner L
Brain Res; 2014 Oct; 1586():143-51. PubMed ID: 25152464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Auditory Performance and Electrical Stimulation Measures in Cochlear Implant Recipients With Auditory Neuropathy Compared With Severe to Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss.
Attias J; Greenstein T; Peled M; Ulanovski D; Wohlgelernter J; Raveh E
Ear Hear; 2017; 38(2):184-193. PubMed ID: 28225734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Frequency change detection and speech perception in cochlear implant users.
Zhang F; Underwood G; McGuire K; Liang C; Moore DR; Fu QJ
Hear Res; 2019 Aug; 379():12-20. PubMed ID: 31035223
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Auditory models of suprathreshold distortion and speech intelligibility in persons with impaired hearing.
Bernstein JG; Summers V; Grassi E; Grant KW
J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Apr; 24(4):307-28. PubMed ID: 23636211
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Assessing the Quality of Low-Frequency Acoustic Hearing: Implications for Combined Electroacoustic Stimulation With Cochlear Implants.
Spitzer ER; Landsberger DM; Friedmann DR
Ear Hear; 2021; 42(2):475-486. PubMed ID: 32976249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Speech and melody recognition in binaurally combined acoustic and electric hearing.
Kong YY; Stickney GS; Zeng FG
J Acoust Soc Am; 2005 Mar; 117(3 Pt 1):1351-61. PubMed ID: 15807023
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Speech perception with combined electric-acoustic stimulation and bilateral cochlear implants in a multisource noise field.
Rader T; Fastl H; Baumann U
Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):324-32. PubMed ID: 23263408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Relationship between spectrotemporal modulation detection and music perception in normal-hearing, hearing-impaired, and cochlear implant listeners.
Choi JE; Won JH; Kim CH; Cho YS; Hong SH; Moon IJ
Sci Rep; 2018 Jan; 8(1):800. PubMed ID: 29335454
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. The role of hearing preservation on electrical thresholds and speech performances in cochlear implantation.
D'Elia A; Bartoli R; Giagnotti F; Quaranta N
Otol Neurotol; 2012 Apr; 33(3):343-7. PubMed ID: 22388729
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Deactivating stimulation sites based on low-rate thresholds improves spectral ripple and speech reception thresholds in cochlear implant users.
Zhou N
J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Mar; 141(3):EL243. PubMed ID: 28372106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Speech masking release in Hybrid cochlear implant users: Roles of spectral and temporal cues in electric-acoustic hearing.
Tejani VD; Brown CJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 May; 147(5):3667. PubMed ID: 32486815
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. A physiologically-inspired model reproducing the speech intelligibility benefit in cochlear implant listeners with residual acoustic hearing.
Zamaninezhad L; Hohmann V; Büchner A; Schädler MR; Jürgens T
Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():50-61. PubMed ID: 27838372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Comparing spatial tuning curves, spectral ripple resolution, and speech perception in cochlear implant users.
Anderson ES; Nelson DA; Kreft H; Nelson PB; Oxenham AJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jul; 130(1):364-75. PubMed ID: 21786905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Spectro-temporal cues enhance modulation sensitivity in cochlear implant users.
Zheng Y; Escabí M; Litovsky RY
Hear Res; 2017 Aug; 351():45-54. PubMed ID: 28601530
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Temporal Fine Structure Processing, Pitch, and Speech Perception in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients.
Dincer D'Alessandro H; Ballantyne D; Boyle PJ; De Seta E; DeVincentiis M; Mancini P
Ear Hear; 2018; 39(4):679-686. PubMed ID: 29194080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Music Perception of Adolescents Using Electroacoustic Hearing.
Driscoll VD; Welhaven AE; Gfeller K; Oleson J; Olszewski CP
Otol Neurotol; 2016 Feb; 37(2):e141-7. PubMed ID: 26756148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Psychoacoustic and Demographic Factors for Speech Recognition of Older Adult Cochlear Implant Users.
Luo X; Kolberg C; Pulling KR; Azuma T
J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2020 Jun; 63(6):1712-1725. PubMed ID: 32501736
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Impact of low-frequency hearing.
Büchner A; Schüssler M; Battmer RD; Stöver T; Lesinski-Schiedat A; Lenarz T
Audiol Neurootol; 2009; 14 Suppl 1():8-13. PubMed ID: 19390170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. 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]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
