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.
101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26557346)
1. Pediatric Evaluation of the ClearVoice™ Speech Enhancement Algorithm in Everyday Life. Noël-Petroff N; Mathias N; Ulmann C; Abbeele TV Audiol Res; 2013 Jan; 3(1):e9. PubMed ID: 26557346 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Enhanced hearing in noise for cochlear implant recipients: clinical trial results for a commercially available speech-enhancement strategy. Koch DB; Quick A; Osberger MJ; Saoji A; Litvak L Otol Neurotol; 2014 Jun; 35(5):803-9. PubMed ID: 24691504 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Evaluation of the ClearVoice Strategy in Adults Using HiResolution Fidelity 120 Sound Processing. Kam AC; Ng IH; Cheng MM; Wong TK; Tong MC Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol; 2012 Apr; 5 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S89-92. PubMed ID: 22701156 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Evaluation of Speech Recognition of Cochlear Implant Recipients Using Adaptive, Digital Remote Microphone Technology and a Speech Enhancement Sound Processing Algorithm. Wolfe J; Morais M; Schafer E; Agrawal S; Koch D J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 May; 26(5):502-508. PubMed ID: 26055839 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Optimising the effect of noise reduction algorithm ClearVoice in cochlear implant users by increasing the maximum comfort levels. Dingemanse JG; Goedegebure A Int J Audiol; 2018 Mar; 57(3):230-235. PubMed ID: 29065731 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Postlingual adult performance in noise with HiRes 120 and ClearVoice Low, Medium, and High. Holden LK; Brenner C; Reeder RM; Firszt JB Cochlear Implants Int; 2013 Nov; 14(5):276-86. PubMed ID: 23683298 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. 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]
10. Clinical Outcomes of the Cochlear™ Nucleus(®) 5 Cochlear Implant System and SmartSound™ 2 Signal Processing. Runge CL; Henion K; Tarima S; Beiter A; Zwolan TA J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 Jun; 27(6):425-440. PubMed ID: 27310402 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Functional benefits of sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in children with long inter-stage interval between two implants. Kim JS; Kim LS; Jeong SW Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2013 Feb; 77(2):162-9. PubMed ID: 23137855 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Benefits of bilateral electrical stimulation with the nucleus cochlear implant in adults: 6-month postoperative results. Laszig R; Aschendorff A; Stecker M; Müller-Deile J; Maune S; Dillier N; Weber B; Hey M; Begall K; Lenarz T; Battmer RD; Böhm M; Steffens T; Strutz J; Linder T; Probst R; Allum J; Westhofen M; Doering W Otol Neurotol; 2004 Nov; 25(6):958-68. PubMed ID: 15547426 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Improving speech perception in noise for children with cochlear implants. Gifford RH; Olund AP; DeJong M J Am Acad Audiol; 2011 Oct; 22(9):623-632. PubMed ID: 22192607 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of a New Algorithm to Optimize Audibility in Cochlear Implant Recipients. Holden LK; Firszt JB; Reeder RM; Dwyer NY; Stein AL; Litvak LM Ear Hear; 2019; 40(4):990-1000. PubMed ID: 30418283 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Everyday Listening Performance of Children Before and After Receiving a Second Cochlear Implant: Results Using the Parent Version of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale. Galvin KL; Mok M Ear Hear; 2016; 37(1):93-102. PubMed ID: 26418045 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. HiResolution and conventional sound processing in the HiResolution bionic ear: using appropriate outcome measures to assess speech recognition ability. Koch DB; Osberger MJ; Segel P; Kessler D Audiol Neurootol; 2004; 9(4):214-23. PubMed ID: 15205549 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Speech reception threshold benefits in cochlear implant users with an adaptive beamformer in real life situations. Geißler G; Arweiler I; Hehrmann P; Lenarz T; Hamacher V; Büchner A Cochlear Implants Int; 2015 Mar; 16(2):69-76. PubMed ID: 24993633 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. An investigation of input level range for the nucleus 24 cochlear implant system: speech perception performance, program preference, and loudness comfort ratings. James CJ; Skinner MW; Martin LF; Holden LK; Galvin KL; Holden TA; Whitford L Ear Hear; 2003 Apr; 24(2):157-74. PubMed ID: 12677112 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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] [Next] [New Search]