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 *

58 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28204872)

  • 1. Comment on the paper by Dazert et al. entitled 'Off the ear with no loss in speech understanding: comparing the RONDO and the OPUS 2 cochlear implant audio processors'.
    Wimmer W; Caversaccio M; Kompis M
    Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2017 Aug; 274(8):3261-3262. PubMed ID: 28204872
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Reply to Wimmer et al.'s comments concerning: 'off the ear with no loss in speech understanding: comparing the RONDO and the OPUS 2 cochlear implant audio processors'.
    Mlynski R
    Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2017 Aug; 274(8):3263. PubMed ID: 28224281
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Off the ear with no loss in speech understanding: comparing the RONDO and the OPUS 2 cochlear implant audio processors.
    Dazert S; Thomas JP; Büchner A; Müller J; Hempel JM; Löwenheim H; Mlynski R
    Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2017 Mar; 274(3):1391-1395. PubMed ID: 27909888
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Improvements in speech perception after the upgrade from the TEMPO+ to the OPUS 2 audio processor.
    Seebens Y; Diller G
    ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec; 2012; 74(1):6-11. PubMed ID: 22094825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Choice of ear for cochlear implantation in adults with monaural sound-deprivation and unilateral hearing aid.
    Boisvert I; Lyxell B; Mäki-Torkko E; McMahon CM; Dowell RC
    Otol Neurotol; 2012 Jun; 33(4):572-9. PubMed ID: 22588234
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. From TEMPO+ to OPUS 2: what can music tests tell us about processor upgrades?
    van Besouw RM; Grasmeder ML
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2011 Aug; 12 Suppl 2():S40-3. PubMed ID: 21917218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Importance of age and postimplantation experience on speech perception measures in children with sequential bilateral cochlear implants.
    Peters BR; Litovsky R; Parkinson A; Lake J
    Otol Neurotol; 2007 Aug; 28(5):649-57. PubMed ID: 17712290
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 1-year postactivation results for sequentially implanted bilateral cochlear implant users.
    Wolfe J; Baker S; Caraway T; Kasulis H; Mears A; Smith J; Swim L; Wood M
    Otol Neurotol; 2007 Aug; 28(5):589-96. PubMed ID: 17667768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Bilateral sequential cochlear implantation in the congenitally deaf child: evidence to support the concept of a 'critical age' after which the second ear is less likely to provide an adequate level of speech perception on its own.
    Graham J; Vickers D; Eyles J; Brinton J; Al Malky G; Aleksy W; Martin J; Henderson L; Mawman D; Robinson P; Midgley E; Hanvey K; Twomey T; Johnson S; Vanat Z; Broxholme C; McAnallen C; Allen A; Bray M
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2009 Sep; 10(3):119-41. PubMed ID: 19593746
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Relative importance of monaural sound deprivation and bilateral significant hearing loss in predicting cochlear implantation outcomes.
    Boisvert I; McMahon CM; Tremblay G; Lyxell B
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(6):758-66. PubMed ID: 21750463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. [How does a cochlear implant speech processor work?].
    Adunka O; Kiefer J
    Laryngorhinootologie; 2005 Nov; 84(11):841-50; quiz 851-4. PubMed ID: 16358193
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Long-term asymmetric hearing affects cochlear implantation outcomes differently in adults with pre- and postlingual hearing loss.
    Boisvert I; McMahon CM; Dowell RC; Lyxell B
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(6):e0129167. PubMed ID: 26043227
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [Noise signal reduction in cochlear implant speech processors].
    Müller-Deile J
    HNO; 1995 Sep; 43(9):545-51. PubMed ID: 7591867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Speech perception in noise with implant and hearing aid.
    Armstrong M; Pegg P; James C; Blamey P
    Am J Otol; 1997 Nov; 18(6 Suppl):S140-1. PubMed ID: 9391635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Performance of subjects fit with the Advanced Bionics CII and Nucleus 3G cochlear implant devices.
    Spahr AJ; Dorman MF
    Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2004 May; 130(5):624-8. PubMed ID: 15148187
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Auditory implant research at the House Ear Institute 1989-2013.
    Shannon RV
    Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 322():57-66. PubMed ID: 25449009
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The cochlear implant; basic principles.
    Brackmann DE
    Laryngoscope; 1976 Mar; 86(3):373-88. PubMed ID: 1256212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Speech-in-noise and subjective benefit with active middle ear implant omnidirectional and directional microphones: a within-subjects comparison.
    Wolframm MD; Giarbini N; Streitberger C
    Otol Neurotol; 2012 Jun; 33(4):618-22. PubMed ID: 22569145
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Speech perception for adults who use hearing aids in conjunction with cochlear implants in opposite ears.
    Mok M; Grayden D; Dowell RC; Lawrence D
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Apr; 49(2):338-51. PubMed ID: 16671848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Simultaneous bilateral cochlear implantation in adults: a multicenter clinical study.
    Litovsky R; Parkinson A; Arcaroli J; Sammeth C
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):714-31. PubMed ID: 17086081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 3.