245 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24975235)
1. Investigation into the applicability and optimization of the Dutch matrix sentence test for use with cochlear implant users.
Theelen-van den Hoek FL; Houben R; Dreschler WA
Int J Audiol; 2014 Nov; 53(11):817-28. PubMed ID: 24975235
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Investigation of a matrix sentence test in noise: reproducibility and discrimination function in cochlear implant patients.
Hey M; Hocke T; Hedderich J; Müller-Deile J
Int J Audiol; 2014 Dec; 53(12):895-902. PubMed ID: 25140602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Characteristics and international comparability of the Finnish matrix sentence test in cochlear implant recipients.
Dietz A; Buschermöhle M; Sivonen V; Willberg T; Aarnisalo AA; Lenarz T; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():80-7. PubMed ID: 26364512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Development and evaluation of the Turkish matrix sentence test.
Zokoll MA; Fidan D; Türkyılmaz D; Hochmuth S; Ergenç İ; Sennaroğlu G; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():51-61. PubMed ID: 26443486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Recognition of speech presented at soft to loud levels by adult cochlear implant recipients of three cochlear implant systems.
Firszt JB; Holden LK; Skinner MW; Tobey EA; Peterson A; Gaggl W; Runge-Samuelson CL; Wackym PA
Ear Hear; 2004 Aug; 25(4):375-87. PubMed ID: 15292777
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Combining directional microphone and single-channel noise reduction algorithms: a clinical evaluation in difficult listening conditions with cochlear implant users.
Hersbach AA; Arora K; Mauger SJ; Dawson PW
Ear Hear; 2012; 33(4):e13-23. PubMed ID: 22555182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Assessing speech recognition abilities with digits in noise in cochlear implant and hearing aid users.
Kaandorp MW; Smits C; Merkus P; Goverts ST; Festen JM
Int J Audiol; 2015 Jan; 54(1):48-57. PubMed ID: 25156097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Application of Noise Reduction Algorithm ClearVoice in Cochlear Implant Processing: Effects on Noise Tolerance and Speech Intelligibility in Noise in Relation to Spectral Resolution.
Dingemanse JG; Goedegebure A
Ear Hear; 2015; 36(3):357-67. PubMed ID: 25479412
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Efficient Adaptive Speech Reception Threshold Measurements Using Stochastic Approximation Algorithms.
Dingemanse G; Goedegebure A
Trends Hear; 2019; 23():2331216520919199. PubMed ID: 32425135
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An adaptive Australian Sentence Test in Noise (AuSTIN).
Dawson PW; Hersbach AA; Swanson BA
Ear Hear; 2013 Sep; 34(5):592-600. PubMed ID: 23598772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Speech understanding in background noise with the two-microphone adaptive beamformer BEAM in the Nucleus Freedom Cochlear Implant System.
Spriet A; Van Deun L; Eftaxiadis K; Laneau J; Moonen M; van Dijk B; van Wieringen A; Wouters J
Ear Hear; 2007 Feb; 28(1):62-72. PubMed ID: 17204899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Development of the Russian matrix sentence test.
Warzybok A; Zokoll M; Wardenga N; Ozimek E; Boboshko M; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():35-43. PubMed ID: 25843088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. An Italian matrix sentence test for the evaluation of speech intelligibility in noise.
Puglisi GE; Warzybok A; Hochmuth S; Visentin C; Astolfi A; Prodi N; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():44-50. PubMed ID: 26371592
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessment of the Speech Intelligibility Performance of Post Lingual Cochlear Implant Users at Different Signal-to-Noise Ratios Using the Turkish Matrix Test.
Polat Z; Bulut E; Ataş A
Balkan Med J; 2016 Sep; 33(5):532-538. PubMed ID: 27761281
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Speech intelligibility as a predictor of cochlear implant outcome in prelingually deafened adults.
van Dijkhuizen JN; Beers M; Boermans PP; Briaire JJ; Frijns JH
Ear Hear; 2011; 32(4):445-58. PubMed ID: 21258238
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The relation of hearing-specific patient-reported outcome measures with speech perception measures and acceptable noise levels in cochlear implant users.
Dingemanse G; Goedegebure A
Int J Audiol; 2020 Jun; 59(6):416-426. PubMed ID: 32091274
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. An Evaluation of Output Signal to Noise Ratio as a Predictor of Cochlear Implant Speech Intelligibility.
Watkins GD; Swanson BA; Suaning GJ
Ear Hear; 2018; 39(5):958-968. PubMed ID: 29474218
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Development of a Dutch matrix sentence test to assess speech intelligibility in noise.
Houben R; Koopman J; Luts H; Wagener KC; van Wieringen A; Verschuure H; Dreschler WA
Int J Audiol; 2014 Oct; 53(10):760-3. PubMed ID: 24959915
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Benefit of a commercially available cochlear implant processor with dual-microphone beamforming: a multi-center study.
Wolfe J; Parkinson A; Schafer EC; Gilden J; Rehwinkel K; Mansanares J; Coughlan E; Wright J; Torres J; Gannaway S
Otol Neurotol; 2012 Jun; 33(4):553-60. PubMed ID: 22588233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
