BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

170 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23464031)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. Factors constraining the benefit to speech understanding of combining information from low-frequency hearing and a cochlear implant.
    Dorman MF; Cook S; Spahr A; Zhang T; Loiselle L; Schramm D; Whittingham J; Gifford R
    Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 322():107-11. PubMed ID: 25285624
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Effects of speaking style on speech intelligibility for Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users.
    Li Y; Zhang G; Kang HY; Liu S; Han D; Fu QJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jun; 129(6):EL242-7. PubMed ID: 21682359
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Understanding the effect of noise on electrical stimulation sequences in cochlear implants and its impact on speech intelligibility.
    Qazi OU; van Dijk B; Moonen M; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2013 May; 299():79-87. PubMed ID: 23396271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. 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]  

  • 26. 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]  

  • 27. Effects of early and late reflections on intelligibility of reverberated speech by cochlear implant listeners.
    Hu Y; Kokkinakis K
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):EL22-8. PubMed ID: 24437852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Masking release and the contribution of obstruent consonants on speech recognition in noise by cochlear implant users.
    Li N; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Sep; 128(3):1262-71. PubMed ID: 20815461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Spectral density affects the intelligibility of tone-vocoded speech: Implications for cochlear implant simulations.
    Rosen S; Zhang Y; Speers K
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Sep; 138(3):EL318-23. PubMed ID: 26428833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The potential of onset enhancement for increased speech intelligibility in auditory prostheses.
    Koning R; Wouters J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Oct; 132(4):2569-81. PubMed ID: 23039450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Adjustments of the amplitude mapping function: Sensitivity of cochlear implant users and effects on subjective preference and speech recognition.
    Theelen-van den Hoek FL; Boymans M; van Dijk B; Dreschler WA
    Int J Audiol; 2016 Nov; 55(11):674-87. PubMed ID: 27447758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Bilateral Versus Unilateral Cochlear Implantation in Adult Listeners: Speech-On-Speech Masking and Multitalker Localization.
    Rana B; Buchholz JM; Morgan C; Sharma M; Weller T; Konganda SA; Shirai K; Kawano A
    Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517722106. PubMed ID: 28752811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. 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]  

  • 34. A bio-inspired coding (BIC) strategy for cochlear implants.
    Tabibi S; Kegel A; Lai WK; Dillier N
    Hear Res; 2020 Mar; 388():107885. PubMed ID: 32035288
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Multi-microphone adaptive noise reduction strategies for coordinated stimulation in bilateral cochlear implant devices.
    Kokkinakis K; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 May; 127(5):3136-44. PubMed ID: 21117762
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. 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]  

  • 37. Optimizing the perception of soft speech and speech in noise with the Advanced Bionics cochlear implant system.
    Holden LK; Reeder RM; Firszt JB; Finley CC
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Apr; 50(4):255-69. PubMed ID: 21275500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Development and validation of the Leuven intelligibility sentence test with male speaker (LIST-m).
    Jansen S; Koning R; Wouters J; van Wieringen A
    Int J Audiol; 2014 Jan; 53(1):55-9. PubMed ID: 24152309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The Lombard effect observed in speech produced by cochlear implant users in noisy environments: A naturalistic study.
    Lee J; Ali H; Ziaei A; Tobey EA; Hansen JHL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Apr; 141(4):2788. PubMed ID: 28464686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Spectral contrast enhancement improves speech intelligibility in noise for cochlear implants.
    Nogueira W; Rode T; Büchner A
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Feb; 139(2):728-39. PubMed ID: 26936556
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.