BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26520350)

  • 1. Audio-vocal responses elicited in adult cochlear implant users.
    Loucks TM; Suneel D; Aronoff JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Oct; 138(4):EL393-8. PubMed ID: 26520350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. [Cochlear implantation and auditory feedback].
    Hamzavi J; Deutsch W; Baumgartner WD; Denk DM; Adunka O; Gstoettner W
    Wien Klin Wochenschr; 2000 Jun; 112(11):515-8. PubMed ID: 10890132
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cochlear Implant Users' Vocal Control CorrelatesAcross Tasks.
    Abbs E; Aronoff JM; Kirchner A; O'Brien E; Harmon B
    J Voice; 2020 May; 34(3):490.e7-490.e10. PubMed ID: 30447798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Influence of Auditory Feedback and Vocal Rehabilitation on Prelingual Hearing-Impaired Individuals Post Cochlear Implant.
    Ubrig MT; Tsuji RK; Weber R; Menezes MHM; Barrichelo VMO; da Cunha MGB; Tsuji DH; Goffi-Gomez MVS
    J Voice; 2019 Nov; 33(6):947.e1-947.e9. PubMed ID: 30174224
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Sex-related differences in vocal responses to pitch feedback perturbations during sustained vocalization.
    Chen Z; Liu P; Jones JA; Huang D; Liu H
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Dec; 128(6):EL355-60. PubMed ID: 21218857
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Long-term Average Speech Spectra of Postlingual Cochlear Implant Users.
    Yüksel M; Gündüz B
    J Voice; 2019 Mar; 33(2):255.e19-255.e25. PubMed ID: 29329722
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Voice analysis of postlingually deaf adults pre- and postcochlear implantation.
    Ubrig MT; Goffi-Gomez MV; Weber R; Menezes MH; Nemr NK; Tsuji DH; Tsuji RK
    J Voice; 2011 Nov; 25(6):692-9. PubMed ID: 21367577
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Vowel identification by cochlear implant users: contributions of static and dynamic spectral cues.
    Donaldson GS; Rogers CL; Cardenas ES; Russell BA; Hanna NH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct; 134(4):3021-8. PubMed ID: 24116437
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of envelope bandwidth on importance functions for cochlear implant simulations.
    Whitmal NA; DeMaio D; Lin R
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Feb; 137(2):733-44. PubMed ID: 25698008
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Principal component analysis reveals differential attentional modulation of the vocal response to pitch perturbation.
    Okazaki S; Mori K; Okada M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jul; 136(1):334-40. PubMed ID: 24993217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of Phantom Electrode Stimulation on Vocal Production in Cochlear Implant Users.
    Caldwell MT; Jiradejvong P; Limb CJ
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(5):1127-1139. PubMed ID: 30601240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Unexpected intensity changes in the ear canal during a F(0)-shifted feedback experiment.
    Tlumak AI; Szuminsky NJ; Shaiman S; Pratt SR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Nov; 134(5):EL413-9. PubMed ID: 24181984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The discrimination of voice cues in simulations of bimodal electro-acoustic cochlear-implant hearing.
    Başkent D; Luckmann A; Ceha J; Gaudrain E; Tamati TN
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Apr; 143(4):EL292. PubMed ID: 29716273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Influence of bilateral cochlear implants on vocal control.
    Kirchner A; Loucks TM; Abbs E; Shi K; Yu JW; Aronoff JM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 Apr; 147(4):2423. PubMed ID: 32359322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effects of delayed auditory feedback (DAF) on the pitch-shift reflex.
    Hain TC; Burnett TA; Larson CR; Kiran S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 May; 109(5 Pt 1):2146-52. PubMed ID: 11386566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Pitch and loudness matching of unmodulated and modulated stimuli in cochlear implantees.
    Vandali A; Sly D; Cowan R; van Hoesel R
    Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 302():32-49. PubMed ID: 23685148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. An integrated model of pitch perception incorporating place and temporal pitch codes with application to cochlear implant research.
    Erfanian Saeedi N; Blamey PJ; Burkitt AN; Grayden DB
    Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():135-147. PubMed ID: 27845260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Auditory-Perceptual Evaluation of Voice Quality of Cochlear-implanted and Normal-hearing Individuals: A Reliability Study.
    Coelho AC; Brasolotto AG; Fernandes ACN; de Souza Medved DM; da Silva EM; Júnior FB
    J Voice; 2017 Nov; 31(6):774.e1-774.e8. PubMed ID: 28318969
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A cochlear implant user with exceptional musical hearing ability.
    Maarefvand M; Marozeau J; Blamey PJ
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Jun; 52(6):424-32. PubMed ID: 23509878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.