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 *

254 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22215451)

  • 61. Timbre discrimination in cochlear implant users and normal hearing subjects using cross-faded synthetic tones.
    Rahne T; Böhme L; Götze G
    J Neurosci Methods; 2011 Aug; 199(2):290-5. PubMed ID: 21664377
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 62. Pure-tone auditory stream segregation and speech perception in noise in cochlear implant recipients.
    Hong RS; Turner CW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Jul; 120(1):360-74. PubMed ID: 16875232
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 63. Psychoacoustic and electrophysiological electric-acoustic interaction effects in cochlear implant users with ipsilateral residual hearing.
    Imsiecke M; Büchner A; Lenarz T; Nogueira W
    Hear Res; 2020 Feb; 386():107873. PubMed ID: 31884220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 64. The effect of different cochlear implant microphones on acoustic hearing individuals' binaural benefits for speech perception in noise.
    Aronoff JM; Freed DJ; Fisher LM; Pal I; Soli SD
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(4):468-84. PubMed ID: 21412155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 65. Impact of room acoustic parameters on speech and music perception among participants with cochlear implants.
    Eurich B; Klenzner T; Oehler M
    Hear Res; 2019 Jun; 377():122-132. PubMed ID: 30933704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 66. Correlations Between Pitch and Phoneme Perception in Cochlear Implant Users and Their Normal Hearing Peers.
    Goldsworthy RL
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2015 Dec; 16(6):797-809. PubMed ID: 26373936
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 67. 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]  

  • 68. Loudness Balancing Optimization for Better Speech Intelligibility, Music Perception, and Spectral Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users.
    Deniz B; Deniz R; Ataş A
    Otol Neurotol; 2024 Jun; 45(5):e385-e392. PubMed ID: 38518764
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 69. Results using the OPAL strategy in Mandarin speaking cochlear implant recipients.
    Vandali AE; Dawson PW; Arora K
    Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup2):S74-S85. PubMed ID: 27329178
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 70. Tone, rhythm, and timbre perception in school-age children using cochlear implants and hearing aids.
    Innes-Brown H; Marozeau JP; Storey CM; Blamey PJ
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Oct; 24(9):789-806. PubMed ID: 24224987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 71. Spatial Release From Masking in Simulated Cochlear Implant Users With and Without Access to Low-Frequency Acoustic Hearing.
    Williges B; Dietz M; Hohmann V; Jürgens T
    Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 72. Effects of noise exposure on young adults with normal audiograms II: Behavioral measures.
    Prendergast G; Millman RE; Guest H; Munro KJ; Kluk K; Dewey RS; Hall DA; Heinz MG; Plack CJ
    Hear Res; 2017 Dec; 356():74-86. PubMed ID: 29126651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 73. Modulation frequency discrimination with modulated and unmodulated interference in normal hearing and in cochlear-implant users.
    Kreft HA; Nelson DA; Oxenham AJ
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2013 Aug; 14(4):591-601. PubMed ID: 23632651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 74. Pitch and lexical tone perception of bilingual English-Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant recipients, hearing aid users, and normally hearing listeners.
    Looi V; Teo ER; Loo J
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2015 Sep; 16 Suppl 3():S91-S104. PubMed ID: 26561892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 75. Electric-acoustic forward masking in cochlear implant users with ipsilateral residual hearing.
    Imsiecke M; Krüger B; Büchner A; Lenarz T; Nogueira W
    Hear Res; 2018 Jul; 364():25-37. PubMed ID: 29673567
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 76. Accuracy of cochlear implant recipients in speech reception in the presence of background music.
    Gfeller K; Turner C; Oleson J; Kliethermes S; Driscoll V
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 2012 Dec; 121(12):782-91. PubMed ID: 23342550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 77. A psychoacoustic application for the adjustment of electrical hearing thresholds in cochlear implant patients.
    Plesch J; Ernst BP; Strieth S; Rader T
    PLoS One; 2019; 14(10):e0223625. PubMed ID: 31603927
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 78. Electric-Acoustic Stimulation After Reimplantation: Hearing Preservation and Speech Perception.
    Thompson NJ; Dillon MT; Bucker AL; King ER; Pillsbury HC; Brown KD
    Otol Neurotol; 2019 Feb; 40(2):e94-e98. PubMed ID: 30624400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 79. Tone discrimination and speech perception benefit in Mandarin-speaking children fit with HiRes fidelity 120 sound processing.
    Chang YT; Yang HM; Lin YH; Liu SH; Wu JL
    Otol Neurotol; 2009 Sep; 30(6):750-7. PubMed ID: 19704359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 80. Acceptance and Benefit of Electroacoustic Stimulation in Children.
    Spitzer ER; Kay-Rivest E; Waltzman SB; O'Brien-Russo CA; Santacatterina M; Roland JT; Landsberger DM; Friedmann DR
    Otol Neurotol; 2023 Jun; 44(5):453-461. PubMed ID: 37167445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.