786 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27329178)
1. Results using the OPAL strategy in Mandarin speaking cochlear implant recipients.
Vandali AE; Dawson PW; Arora K
Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup2):S74-S85. PubMed ID: 27329178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Lexical tone recognition in noise in normal-hearing children and prelingually deafened children with cochlear implants.
Mao Y; Xu L
Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup2):S23-S30. PubMed ID: 27564095
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Electric and acoustic harmonic integration predicts speech-in-noise performance in hybrid cochlear implant users.
Bonnard D; Schwalje A; Gantz B; Choi I
Hear Res; 2018 Sep; 367():223-230. PubMed ID: 29980380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Tone perception in Mandarin-speaking children with cochlear implants.
Li G; Soli SD; Zheng Y
Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup2):S49-S59. PubMed ID: 28532185
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Bimodal benefits in Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant users with contralateral residual acoustic hearing.
Yang HI; Zeng FG
Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup2):S17-S22. PubMed ID: 28485635
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Masking release with changing fundamental frequency: Electric acoustic stimulation resembles normal hearing subjects.
Auinger AB; Riss D; Liepins R; Rader T; Keck T; Keintzel T; Kaider A; Baumgartner WD; Gstoettner W; Arnoldner C
Hear Res; 2017 Jul; 350():226-234. PubMed ID: 28527538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Psychoacoustic and phoneme identification measures in cochlear-implant and normal-hearing listeners.
Goldsworthy RL; Delhorne LA; Braida LD; Reed CM
Trends Amplif; 2013 Mar; 17(1):27-44. PubMed ID: 23429419
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A physiologically-inspired model reproducing the speech intelligibility benefit in cochlear implant listeners with residual acoustic hearing.
Zamaninezhad L; Hohmann V; Büchner A; Schädler MR; Jürgens T
Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():50-61. PubMed ID: 27838372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Effects of insertion depth on spatial speech perception in noise for simulations of cochlear implants and single-sided deafness.
Zhou X; Li H; Galvin JJ; Fu QJ; Yuan W
Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup2):S41-S48. PubMed ID: 27367147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Validation of list equivalency for Mandarin speech materials to use with cochlear implant listeners.
Li Y; Wang S; Su Q; Galvin JJ; Fu QJ
Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup2):S31-S40. PubMed ID: 27414242
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Vowel and tone recognition in quiet and in noise among Mandarin-speaking amusics.
Tang W; Wang XJ; Li JQ; Liu C; Dong Q; Nan Y
Hear Res; 2018 Jun; 363():62-69. PubMed ID: 29534831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Characteristics and international comparability of the Finnish matrix sentence test in cochlear implant recipients.
Dietz A; Buschermöhle M; Sivonen V; Willberg T; Aarnisalo AA; Lenarz T; Kollmeier B
Int J Audiol; 2015; 54 Suppl 2():80-7. PubMed ID: 26364512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Speech perception in Mandarin-speaking children with cochlear implants: A systematic review.
Chen Y; Wong LLN
Int J Audiol; 2017; 56(sup2):S7-S16. PubMed ID: 28296526
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Factors Affecting Bimodal Benefit in Pediatric Mandarin-Speaking Chinese Cochlear Implant Users.
Liu YW; Tao DD; Chen B; Cheng X; Shu Y; Galvin JJ; Fu QJ
Ear Hear; 2019; 40(6):1316-1327. PubMed ID: 30882534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Voice gender discrimination provides a measure of more than pitch-related perception in cochlear implant users.
Li T; Fu QJ
Int J Audiol; 2011 Aug; 50(8):498-502. PubMed ID: 21696330
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Pitch and lexical tone perception of bilingual English-Mandarin-speaking cochlear implant recipients, hearing aid users, and normally hearing listeners.
Looi V; Teo ER; Loo J
Cochlear Implants Int; 2015 Sep; 16 Suppl 3():S91-S104. PubMed ID: 26561892
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A directional remote-microphone for bimodal cochlear implant recipients.
Vroegop JL; Homans NC; Goedegebure A; van der Schroeff MP
Int J Audiol; 2018 Nov; 57(11):858-863. PubMed ID: 30261771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
