493 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26968076)
1. A multicentre clinical evaluation of paediatric cochlear implant users upgrading to the Nucleus(®) 6 system.
Plasmans A; Rushbrooke E; Moran M; Spence C; Theuwis L; Zarowski A; Offeciers E; Atkinson B; McGovern J; Dornan D; Leigh J; Kaicer A; Hollow R; Martelli L; Looi V; Nel E; Del Dot J; Cowan R; Mauger SJ
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2016 Apr; 83():193-9. PubMed ID: 26968076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Benefit of a commercially available cochlear implant processor with dual-microphone beamforming: a multi-center study.
Wolfe J; Parkinson A; Schafer EC; Gilden J; Rehwinkel K; Mansanares J; Coughlan E; Wright J; Torres J; Gannaway S
Otol Neurotol; 2012 Jun; 33(4):553-60. PubMed ID: 22588233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Benefits of Adaptive Signal Processing in a Commercially Available Cochlear Implant Sound Processor.
Wolfe J; Neumann S; Marsh M; Schafer E; Lianos L; Gilden J; O'Neill L; Arkis P; Menapace C; Nel E; Jones M
Otol Neurotol; 2015 Aug; 36(7):1181-90. PubMed ID: 26049314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Conversion of adult Nucleus® 5 cochlear implant users to the Nucleus® 6 system.
De Ceulaer G; Swinnen F; Pascoal D; Philips B; Killian M; James C; Govaerts PJ; Dhooge I
Cochlear Implants Int; 2015 Jul; 16(4):222-32. PubMed ID: 25284643
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Benefit of the UltraZoom beamforming technology in noise in cochlear implant users.
Mosnier I; Mathias N; Flament J; Amar D; Liagre-Callies A; Borel S; Ambert-Dahan E; Sterkers O; Bernardeschi D
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2017 Sep; 274(9):3335-3342. PubMed ID: 28664331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The effect of front-end processing on cochlear implant performance of children.
Wolfe J; Schafer EC; John A; Hudson M
Otol Neurotol; 2011 Jun; 32(4):533-8. PubMed ID: 21436756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Clinical outcomes with the Kanso™ off-the-ear cochlear implant sound processor.
Mauger SJ; Jones M; Nel E; Del Dot J
Int J Audiol; 2017 Apr; 56(4):267-276. PubMed ID: 28067077
[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]
9. 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]
10. A clinical assessment of cochlear implant recipient performance: implications for individualized map settings in specific environments.
Hey M; Hocke T; Mauger S; Müller-Deile J
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2016 Nov; 273(11):4011-4020. PubMed ID: 27276990
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluation of speech reception threshold in noise in young Cochlear™ Nucleus
Razza S; Zaccone M; Meli A; Cristofari E
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2017 Dec; 103():71-75. PubMed ID: 29224769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Clinical evaluation of the Nucleus 6 cochlear implant system: performance improvements with SmartSound iQ.
Mauger SJ; Warren CD; Knight MR; Goorevich M; Nel E
Int J Audiol; 2014 Aug; 53(8):564-76. PubMed ID: 25005776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Controlled comparative clinical trial of hearing benefit outcomes for users of the Cochlear™ Nucleus
Warren CD; Nel E; Boyd PJ
Cochlear Implants Int; 2019 May; 20(3):116-126. PubMed ID: 30714500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Hearing performance in single-sided deaf cochlear implant users after upgrade to a single-unit speech processor.
Mertens G; Hofkens A; Punte AK; De Bodt M; Van de Heyning P
Otol Neurotol; 2015 Jan; 36(1):51-60. PubMed ID: 25406874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Contribution of noise reduction pre-processing and microphone directionality strategies in the speech recognition in noise in adult cochlear implant users.
Goffi-Gomez MVS; Muniz L; Wiemes G; Onuki LC; Calonga L; Osterne FJ; Kós MI; Caldas FF; Cardoso C; Cagnacci B
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2021 Aug; 278(8):2823-2828. PubMed ID: 32948894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of the Optimized Pitch and Language Strategy in Cochlear Implant Recipients.
Vandali A; Dawson P; Au A; Yu Y; Brown M; Goorevich M; Cowan R
Ear Hear; 2019; 40(3):555-567. PubMed ID: 30067558
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Speech perception in noise: Impact of directional microphones in users of combined electric-acoustic stimulation.
Weissgerber T; Stöver T; Baumann U
PLoS One; 2019; 14(3):e0213251. PubMed ID: 30840668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Investigating Speech Recognition and listening effort with different device configurations in adult cochlear implant users.
Sladen DP; Nie Y; Berg K
Cochlear Implants Int; 2018 May; 19(3):119-130. PubMed ID: 29457564
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effect of Microphone Configuration and Sound Source Location on Speech Recognition for Adult Cochlear Implant Users with Current-Generation Sound Processors.
Dwyer RT; Roberts J; Gifford RH
J Am Acad Audiol; 2020 Sep; 31(8):578-589. PubMed ID: 32340055
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Microphone directionality and wind noise reduction enhance speech perception in users of the MED-EL SONNET audio processor.
Hagen R; Radeloff A; Stark T; Anderson I; Nopp P; Aschbacher E; Möltner A; Khajehnouri Y; Rak K
Cochlear Implants Int; 2020 Jan; 21(1):53-65. PubMed ID: 31524107
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
