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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25560478)

  • 21. Re-examining the relationship between number of cochlear implant channels and maximal speech intelligibility.
    Croghan NBH; Duran SI; Smith ZM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Dec; 142(6):EL537. PubMed ID: 29289062
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. The early history of the cochlear implant: a retrospective.
    Mudry A; Mills M
    JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2013 May; 139(5):446-53. PubMed ID: 23681026
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Pulse-spreading harmonic complex as an alternative carrier for vocoder simulations of cochlear implants.
    Mesnildrey Q; Hilkhuysen G; Macherey O
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Feb; 139(2):986-91. PubMed ID: 26936577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. The role of the Utah Artificial Ear project in the development of the modern cochlear implant.
    Dorman MF; Parkin JL
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2015 May; 16 Suppl 2():S1-S11. PubMed ID: 25941941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Top-down restoration of speech in cochlear-implant users.
    Bhargava P; Gaudrain E; Başkent D
    Hear Res; 2014 Mar; 309():113-23. PubMed ID: 24368138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Loudness and pitch perception using Dynamically Compensated Virtual Channels.
    Nogueira W; Litvak LM; Landsberger DM; Büchner A
    Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():223-234. PubMed ID: 27939418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. [Rehabilitation of hearing-impaired patients with cochlear implants: a review].
    Gstoettner W; Adunka O; Hamzavi J; Baumgartner WD
    Wien Klin Wochenschr; 2000 Jun; 112(11):464-72. PubMed ID: 10890122
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Information theoretic evaluation of a noiseband-based cochlear implant simulator.
    Aguiar DE; Taylor NE; Li J; Gazanfari DK; Talavage TM; Laflen JB; Neuberger H; Svirsky MA
    Hear Res; 2016 Mar; 333():185-193. PubMed ID: 26409068
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. 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]  

  • 30. Acoustic, aerodynamic, and perceptual analyses of the voice of cochlear-implanted children.
    Guerrero Lopez HA; Mondain M; Amy de la Bretèque B; Serrafero P; Trottier C; Barkat-Defradas M
    J Voice; 2013 Jul; 27(4):523.e1-17. PubMed ID: 23809572
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Clarification requests in everyday interaction involving children with cochlear implants.
    Samuelsson C; Lyxell B
    Logoped Phoniatr Vocol; 2014 Oct; 39(3):130-8. PubMed ID: 23631679
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Period for Normalization of Voice Acoustic Parameters in Indian Pediatric Cochlear Implantees.
    Joy JV; Deshpande S; Vaid DN
    J Voice; 2017 May; 31(3):391.e19-391.e25. PubMed ID: 28029557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Neural envelope tracking as a measure of speech understanding in cochlear implant users.
    Verschueren E; Somers B; Francart T
    Hear Res; 2019 Mar; 373():23-31. PubMed ID: 30580236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Simulating the effect of interaural mismatch in the insertion depth of bilateral cochlear implants on speech perception.
    van Besouw RM; Forrester L; Crowe ND; Rowan D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Aug; 134(2):1348-57. PubMed ID: 23927131
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Perceptual changes in place of stimulation with long cochlear implant electrode arrays.
    Landsberger DM; Mertens G; Punte AK; Van De Heyning P
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Feb; 135(2):EL75-81. PubMed ID: 25234918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Cochlear implant speech intelligibility outcomes with structured and unstructured binary mask errors.
    Kressner AA; Westermann A; Buchholz JM; Rozell CJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Feb; 139(2):800-10. PubMed ID: 26936562
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. What can we expect of normally-developing children implanted at a young age with respect to their auditory, linguistic and cognitive skills?
    van Wieringen A; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 322():171-9. PubMed ID: 25219955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Categorical loudness scaling in cochlear implant recipients.
    Busby PA; Au A
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Nov; 56(11):862-869. PubMed ID: 28639840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Speech Recognition Outcomes After Cochlear Reimplantation Surgery.
    Reis M; Boisvert I; Looi V; da Cruz M
    Trends Hear; 2017; 21():2331216517706398. PubMed ID: 28752810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Loudness summation using focused and unfocused electrical stimulation.
    Padilla M; Landsberger DM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Feb; 135(2):EL102-8. PubMed ID: 25234912
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.