781 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26671316)
1. Effects of Threshold Adjustment on Speech Perception in Nucleus Cochlear Implant Recipients.
Busby PA; Arora K
Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):303-11. PubMed ID: 26671316
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. The Effects of Preprocessing Strategies for Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients.
Rakszawski B; Wright R; Cadieux JH; Davidson LS; Brenner C
J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 Feb; 27(2):85-102. PubMed ID: 26905529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Optimization of programming parameters in children with the advanced bionics cochlear implant.
Baudhuin J; Cadieux J; Firszt JB; Reeder RM; Maxson JL
J Am Acad Audiol; 2012 May; 23(5):302-12. PubMed ID: 22533974
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Adaptive dynamic range optimization for cochlear implants: a preliminary study.
James CJ; Blamey PJ; Martin L; Swanson B; Just Y; Macfarlane D
Ear Hear; 2002 Feb; 23(1 Suppl):49S-58S. PubMed ID: 11883767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Effects of stimulation rate with the Nucleus 24 ACE speech coding strategy.
Holden LK; Skinner MW; Holden TA; Demorest ME
Ear Hear; 2002 Oct; 23(5):463-76. PubMed ID: 12411779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The effect of instantaneous input dynamic range setting on the speech perception of children with the nucleus 24 implant.
Davidson LS; Skinner MW; Holstad BA; Fears BT; Richter MK; Matusofsky M; Brenner C; Holden T; Birath A; Kettel JL; Scollie S
Ear Hear; 2009 Jun; 30(3):340-9. PubMed ID: 19322085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Performance benefits for adults using a cochlear implant with adaptive dynamic range optimization (ADRO): a comparative study.
Müller-Deile J; Kiefer J; Wyss J; Nicolai J; Battmer R
Cochlear Implants Int; 2008 Mar; 9(1):8-26. PubMed ID: 18300224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A comparative study on speech in noise understanding with a direct acoustic cochlear implant in subjects with severe to profound mixed hearing loss.
Lenarz T; Verhaert N; Desloovere C; Desmet J; D'hondt C; González JC; Kludt E; Macías AR; Skarżyński H; Van de Heyning P; Vyncke C; Wasowski A
Audiol Neurootol; 2014; 19(3):164-74. PubMed ID: 24556905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Speech recognition performance of patients with sensorineural hearing loss under unaided and aided conditions using linear and compression hearing AIDS.
Shanks JE; Wilson RH; Larson V; Williams D
Ear Hear; 2002 Aug; 23(4):280-90. PubMed ID: 12195170
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Clinical evaluation of expanded input dynamic range in Nucleus cochlear implants.
Dawson PW; Vandali AE; Knight MR; Heasman JM
Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2):163-76. PubMed ID: 17496668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Interdependence of linguistic and indexical speech perception skills in school-age children with early cochlear implantation.
Geers AE; Davidson LS; Uchanski RM; Nicholas JG
Ear Hear; 2013 Sep; 34(5):562-74. PubMed ID: 23652814
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Amplitude mapping and phoneme recognition in cochlear implant listeners.
Zeng FG; Galvin JJ
Ear Hear; 1999 Feb; 20(1):60-74. PubMed ID: 10037066
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
