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 *

91 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2721827)

  • 21. Place coding of vowel formants for cochlear implant patients.
    Blamey PJ; Clark GM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1990 Aug; 88(2):667-73. PubMed ID: 2212290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Effects of formant bandwidth on the identification of synthetic vowels by cochlear implant recipients.
    Hawks JW; Fourakis MS; Skinner MW; Holden TA; Holden LK
    Ear Hear; 1997 Dec; 18(6):479-87. PubMed ID: 9416450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Changes in vowel quality in post-lingually deafened cochlear implant users.
    Langereis MC; Bosman AJ; van Olphen AF; Smoorenburg GF
    Audiology; 1997; 36(5):279-97. PubMed ID: 9305524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. [An analytical study on recognition confusion of vowels in patients with 22 channel cochlear implant].
    Momoi T
    Nihon Jibiinkoka Gakkai Kaiho; 1995 Aug; 98(8):1318-22. PubMed ID: 7472771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. [Testing of synthetic vowels in patients with 22 channel cochlear implant].
    Saito H; Hakuhisa E; Watanabe K; Yukawa K; Sato T; Funasaka S
    Nihon Jibiinkoka Gakkai Kaiho; 1994 Nov; 97(11):2065-71. PubMed ID: 7823237
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Identification of acoustically similar and dissimilar vowels in profoundly deaf adults who use hearing aids and/or cochlear implants: some preliminary findings.
    Hay-McCutcheon MJ; Peterson NR; Rosado CA; Pisoni DB
    Am J Audiol; 2014 Mar; 23(1):57-70. PubMed ID: 23824440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Frequency discrimination and speech recognition by patients who use the Ineraid and continuous interleaved sampling cochlear-implant signal processors.
    Dorman MF; Smith LM; Smith M; Parkin JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1996 Feb; 99(2):1174-84. PubMed ID: 8609301
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Speech recognition in analog multichannel cochlear prostheses: initial experiments in controlling classifications.
    White MW; Ochs MT; Merzenich MM; Schubert ED
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 1990 Oct; 37(10):1002-10. PubMed ID: 2249858
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Vowel recognition via cochlear implants and noise vocoders: effects of formant movement and duration.
    Iverson P; Smith CA; Evans BG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Dec; 120(6):3998-4006. PubMed ID: 17225426
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The effects of changes in hearing status in cochlear implant users on the acoustic vowel space and CV coarticulation.
    Lane H; Matthies M; Perkell J; Vick J; Zandipour M
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2001 Jun; 44(3):552-63. PubMed ID: 11407560
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. The contribution of apical stimulation to Mandarin speech perception in users of the MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implant.
    Qi B; Liu B; Krenmayr A; Liu S; Gong S; Liu H; Zhang N; Han D
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2011 Jan; 131(1):52-8. PubMed ID: 20863152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Place-pitch and vowel-pitch comparisons in cochlear implant patients using the Melbourne-Nucleus cochlear implant.
    Pauka CK
    J Laryngol Otol Suppl; 1989; 19():1-31. PubMed ID: 2693565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Vowel spaces in Swedish adolescents with cochlear implants.
    Löfqvist A; Sahlén B; Ibertsson T
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Nov; 128(5):3064-9. PubMed ID: 21110601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effects of auditory feedback deprivation length on the vowel /epsilon/ produced by pediatric cochlear-implant users.
    Bharadwaj SV; Graves AG; Bauer DD; Assmann PF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 May; 121(5 Pt1):EL196-202. PubMed ID: 17550203
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The use of static and dynamic vowel cues by multichannel cochlear implant users.
    Kirk KI; Tye-Murray N; Hurtig RR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1992 Jun; 91(6):3487-98. PubMed ID: 1619125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Phoneme recognition by deaf individuals using the multichannel nucleus cochlear implant.
    Mülder HE; Van Olphen AF; Bosman A; Smoorenburg GF
    Acta Otolaryngol; 1992 Nov; 112(6):946-55. PubMed ID: 1481665
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Vowel confusion patterns in adults during initial 4 years of implant use.
    Välimaa TT; Sorri MJ; Laitakari J; Sivonen V; Muhli A
    Clin Linguist Phon; 2011 Feb; 25(2):121-44. PubMed ID: 21070135
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Perception of back vowels: effects of varying F1 - F0 Bark distance.
    Fahey RP; Diehl RL; Traunmüller H
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1996 Apr; 99(4 Pt 1):2350-7. PubMed ID: 8730081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Vowel space characteristics and vowel identification accuracy.
    Neel AT
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2008 Jun; 51(3):574-85. PubMed ID: 18506036
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. The mechanism of speech perception in patients with a multichannel cochlear implant.
    Ito J; Sakakihara J
    Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci; 1994 Aug; 19(4):346-9. PubMed ID: 7994894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.