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 *

191 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26723365)

  • 21. European multi-centre study of the Nucleus Hybrid L24 cochlear implant.
    Lenarz T; James C; Cuda D; Fitzgerald O'Connor A; Frachet B; Frijns JH; Klenzner T; Laszig R; Manrique M; Marx M; Merkus P; Mylanus EA; Offeciers E; Pesch J; Ramos-Macias A; Robier A; Sterkers O; Uziel A
    Int J Audiol; 2013 Dec; 52(12):838-48. PubMed ID: 23992489
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. 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]  

  • 23. Speech perception in tones and noise via cochlear implants reveals influence of spectral resolution on temporal processing.
    Oxenham AJ; Kreft HA
    Trends Hear; 2014 Oct; 18():. PubMed ID: 25315376
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. 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]  

  • 25. Spectro-temporal cues enhance modulation sensitivity in cochlear implant users.
    Zheng Y; Escabí M; Litovsky RY
    Hear Res; 2017 Aug; 351():45-54. PubMed ID: 28601530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Binaural advantages in users of bimodal and bilateral cochlear implant devices.
    Kokkinakis K; Pak N
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Jan; 135(1):EL47-53. PubMed ID: 24437856
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. The role of continuous low-frequency harmonicity cues for interrupted speech perception in bimodal hearing.
    Oh SH; Donaldson GS; Kong YY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Apr; 139(4):1747. PubMed ID: 27106322
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Sequential stream segregation in normally-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.
    Tejani VD; Schvartz-Leyzac KC; Chatterjee M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jan; 141(1):50. PubMed ID: 28147600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Avoiding disconnection: An evaluation of telephone options for cochlear implant users.
    Marcrum SC; Picou EM; Steffens T
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Mar; 56(3):186-193. PubMed ID: 27809627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Objective measure of binaural processing: Acoustic change complex in response to interaural phase differences.
    Fan Y; Gifford RH
    Hear Res; 2024 Jul; 448():109020. PubMed ID: 38763034
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Fundamental frequency is critical to speech perception in noise in combined acoustic and electric hearing.
    Carroll J; Tiaden S; Zeng FG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Oct; 130(4):2054-62. PubMed ID: 21973360
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. 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]  

  • 33. Rate and onset cues can improve cochlear implant synthetic vowel recognition in noise.
    Mc Laughlin M; Reilly RB; Zeng FG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1546-60. PubMed ID: 23464025
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. The combined effects of reverberation and noise on speech intelligibility by cochlear implant listeners.
    Hazrati O; Loizou PC
    Int J Audiol; 2012 Jun; 51(6):437-43. PubMed ID: 22356300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Speech recognition outcomes following bilateral cochlear implantation in adults aged over 50 years old.
    Boisvert I; McMahon CM; Dowell RC
    Int J Audiol; 2016; 55 Suppl 2():S39-44. PubMed ID: 27049835
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Binaural hearing with electrical stimulation.
    Kan A; Litovsky RY
    Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 322():127-37. PubMed ID: 25193553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. The effect of presentation level and stimulation rate on speech perception and modulation detection for cochlear implant users.
    Brochier T; McDermott HJ; McKay CM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jun; 141(6):4097. PubMed ID: 28618807
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Blind binary masking for reverberation suppression in cochlear implants.
    Hazrati O; Lee J; Loizou PC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Mar; 133(3):1607-14. PubMed ID: 23464030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Assessment of speech recognition abilities in quiet and in noise: a comparison between self-administered home testing and testing in the clinic for adult cochlear implant users.
    de Graaff F; Huysmans E; Merkus P; Theo Goverts S; Smits C
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Nov; 57(11):872-880. PubMed ID: 30261772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 10.