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.
22. Discrimination of Stochastic Frequency Modulation by Cochlear Implant Users. Sheft S; Cheng MY; Shafiro V J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Jun; 26(6):572-81. PubMed ID: 26134724 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. 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]
24. Effects of presentation level on phoneme and sentence recognition in quiet by cochlear implant listeners. Donaldson GS; Allen SL Ear Hear; 2003 Oct; 24(5):392-405. PubMed ID: 14534410 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Speech understanding in noise with the Roger Pen, Naida CI Q70 processor, and integrated Roger 17 receiver in a multi-talker network. De Ceulaer G; Bestel J; Mülder HE; Goldbeck F; de Varebeke SP; Govaerts PJ Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2016 May; 273(5):1107-14. PubMed ID: 25983309 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Benefits of Bilateral Hearing on the Telephone for Cochlear Implant Recipients. Miller S; Wolfe J; Duke M; Schafer E; Agrawal S; Koch D; Neumann S J Am Acad Audiol; 2021 Mar; 32(3):180-185. PubMed ID: 33873219 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The benefits of remote microphone technology for adults with cochlear implants. Fitzpatrick EM; Séguin C; Schramm DR; Armstrong S; Chénier J Ear Hear; 2009 Oct; 30(5):590-9. PubMed ID: 19561509 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Remote Microphone Systems for Cochlear Implant Recipients in Small Group Settings. Miller S; Wolfe J; Neumann S; Schafer EC; Galster J; Agrawal S J Am Acad Audiol; 2022 Mar; 33(3):142-148. PubMed ID: 36216041 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Evaluation of hearing aid frequency response fittings in pediatric and young adult bimodal recipients. Davidson LS; Firszt JB; Brenner C; Cadieux JH J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Apr; 26(4):393-407. PubMed ID: 25879243 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. The use of frequency compression by cochlear implant recipients with postoperative acoustic hearing. McDermott H; Henshall K J Am Acad Audiol; 2010 Jun; 21(6):380-9. PubMed ID: 20701835 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Evaluation of a wireless contralateral routing of signal (CROS) device with the Advanced Bionics Naída CI Q90 sound processor. Ernst A; Baumgaertel RM; Diez A; Battmer RD Cochlear Implants Int; 2019 Jul; 20(4):182-189. PubMed ID: 30821202 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
33. Self-Adjustment of Upper Electrical Stimulation Levels in CI Programming and the Effect on Auditory Functioning. Vroegop JL; Dingemanse JG; van der Schroeff MP; Metselaar RM; Goedegebure A Ear Hear; 2017; 38(4):e232-e240. PubMed ID: 28125445 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Matching Automatic Gain Control Across Devices in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users. Veugen LC; Chalupper J; Snik AF; Opstal AJ; Mens LH Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):260-70. PubMed ID: 26656192 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]