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 *

224 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23231122)

  • 1. Assessing the role of spectral and intensity cues in spectral ripple detection and discrimination in cochlear-implant users.
    Anderson ES; Oxenham AJ; Nelson PB; Nelson DA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Dec; 132(6):3925-34. PubMed ID: 23231122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evidence of across-channel processing for spectral-ripple discrimination in cochlear implant listeners.
    Won JH; Jones GL; Drennan WR; Jameyson EM; Rubinstein JT
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Oct; 130(4):2088-97. PubMed ID: 21973363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. 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]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. Acoustic temporal modulation detection and speech perception in cochlear implant listeners.
    Won JH; Drennan WR; Nie K; Jameyson EM; Rubinstein JT
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jul; 130(1):376-88. PubMed ID: 21786906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Detection and rate discrimination of amplitude modulation in electrical hearing.
    Chatterjee M; Oberzut C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1567-80. PubMed ID: 21895095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Assessment of Spectral and Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users Using Psychoacoustic Discrimination and Speech Cue Categorization.
    Winn MB; Won JH; Moon IJ
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(6):e377-e390. PubMed ID: 27438871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Acoustic cue integration in speech intonation recognition with cochlear implants.
    Peng SC; Chatterjee M; Lu N
    Trends Amplif; 2012 Jun; 16(2):67-82. PubMed ID: 22790392
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. 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]  

  • 13. The ability of cochlear implant users to use temporal envelope cues recovered from speech frequency modulation.
    Won JH; Lorenzi C; Nie K; Li X; Jameyson EM; Drennan WR; Rubinstein JT
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):1113-9. PubMed ID: 22894230
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Spectrotemporal Modulation Discrimination in Infants With Normal Hearing.
    Noble AR; Resnick J; Broncheau M; Klotz S; Rubinstein JT; Werner LA; Horn DL
    Ear Hear; 2023 Jan-Feb 01; 44(1):109-117. PubMed ID: 36218270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Temporal modulation transfer functions in cochlear implantees using a method that limits overall loudness cues.
    Fraser M; McKay CM
    Hear Res; 2012 Jan; 283(1-2):59-69. PubMed ID: 22146425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Perception of stochastic envelopes by normal-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.
    Gomersall PA; Turner RE; Baguley DM; Deeks JM; Gockel HE; Carlyon RP
    Hear Res; 2016 Mar; 333():8-24. PubMed ID: 26706708
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Detection of acoustic temporal fine structure by cochlear implant listeners: behavioral results and computational modeling.
    Imennov NS; Won JH; Drennan WR; Jameyson E; Rubinstein JT
    Hear Res; 2013 Apr; 298():60-72. PubMed ID: 23333260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effects of age and hearing mechanism on spectral resolution in normal hearing and cochlear-implanted listeners.
    Horn DL; Dudley DJ; Dedhia K; Nie K; Drennan WR; Won JH; Rubinstein JT; Werner LA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jan; 141(1):613. PubMed ID: 28147578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.