213 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22894220)
1. Psychophysically based site selection coupled with dichotic stimulation improves speech recognition in noise with bilateral cochlear implants.
Zhou N; Pfingst BE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):994-1008. PubMed ID: 22894220
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Spatial tuning curves from apical, middle, and basal electrodes in cochlear implant users.
Nelson DA; Kreft HA; Anderson ES; Donaldson GS
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jun; 129(6):3916-33. PubMed ID: 21682414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Relationship between multipulse integration and speech recognition with cochlear implants.
Zhou N; Pfingst BE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Sep; 136(3):1257. PubMed ID: 25190399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Improving speech perception in noise with current focusing in cochlear implant users.
Srinivasan AG; Padilla M; Shannon RV; Landsberger DM
Hear Res; 2013 May; 299():29-36. PubMed ID: 23467170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Binaural unmasking with multiple adjacent masking electrodes in bilateral cochlear implant users.
Lu T; Litovsky R; Zeng FG
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jun; 129(6):3934-45. PubMed ID: 21682415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Predicting the speech reception threshold of cochlear implant listeners using an envelope-correlation based measure.
Yousefian N; Loizou PC
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Nov; 132(5):3399-405. PubMed ID: 23145620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. 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]
12. Two-microphone spatial filtering improves speech reception for cochlear-implant users in reverberant conditions with multiple noise sources.
Goldsworthy RL
Trends Hear; 2014 Oct; 18():. PubMed ID: 25330772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Combined spectral and temporal enhancement to improve cochlear-implant speech perception.
Bhattacharya A; Vandali A; Zeng FG
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Nov; 130(5):2951-60. PubMed ID: 22087923
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Stream segregation on a single electrode as a function of pulse rate in cochlear implant listeners.
Duran SI; Collins LM; Throckmorton CS
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Dec; 132(6):3849-55. PubMed ID: 23231115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Consonant recognition as a function of the number of stimulation channels in the Hybrid short-electrode cochlear implant.
Reiss LA; Turner CW; Karsten SA; Erenberg SR; Taylor J; Gantz BJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Nov; 132(5):3406-17. PubMed ID: 23145621
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Effects of electrode configuration on cochlear implant modulation detection thresholds.
Pfingst BE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jun; 129(6):3908-15. PubMed ID: 21682413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Forward masking patterns by low and high-rate stimulation in cochlear implant users: Differences in masking effectiveness and spread of neural excitation.
Zhou N; Dong L; Dixon S
Hear Res; 2020 Apr; 389():107921. PubMed ID: 32097828
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. 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]
20. Relationship between channel interaction and spectral-ripple discrimination in cochlear implant users.
Jones GL; Won JH; Drennan WR; Rubinstein JT
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jan; 133(1):425-33. PubMed ID: 23297914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
