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 *

269 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29032744)

  • 1. Acoustic simulation of cochlear implant hearing: Effect of manipulating various acoustic parameters on intelligibility of speech.
    Jain S; Vipin Ghosh PG
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2018 Jan; 19(1):46-53. PubMed ID: 29032744
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of speech degradation on top-down repair: phonemic restoration with simulations of cochlear implants and combined electric-acoustic stimulation.
    Başkent D
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2012 Oct; 13(5):683-92. PubMed ID: 22569838
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. Effects of Additional Low-Pass-Filtered Speech on Listening Effort for Noise-Band-Vocoded Speech in Quiet and in Noise.
    Pals C; Sarampalis A; van Dijk M; Başkent D
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(1):3-17. PubMed ID: 29757801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Spatial Release From Masking in Simulated Cochlear Implant Users With and Without Access to Low-Frequency Acoustic Hearing.
    Williges B; Dietz M; Hohmann V; Jürgens T
    Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26721918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Adding simultaneous stimulating channels to reduce power consumption in cochlear implants.
    Langner F; Saoji AA; Büchner A; Nogueira W
    Hear Res; 2017 Mar; 345():96-107. PubMed ID: 28104408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Understanding the effect of noise on electrical stimulation sequences in cochlear implants and its impact on speech intelligibility.
    Qazi OU; van Dijk B; Moonen M; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2013 May; 299():79-87. PubMed ID: 23396271
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Simulating the dual-peak excitation pattern produced by bipolar stimulation of a cochlear implant: effects on speech intelligibility.
    Mesnildrey Q; Macherey O
    Hear Res; 2015 Jan; 319():32-47. PubMed ID: 25449010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. An analysis of the effects of electrical field interaction with an acoustic model of cochlear implants.
    Strydom T; Hanekom JJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Apr; 129(4):2213-26. PubMed ID: 21476676
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Spectral density affects the intelligibility of tone-vocoded speech: Implications for cochlear implant simulations.
    Rosen S; Zhang Y; Speers K
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Sep; 138(3):EL318-23. PubMed ID: 26428833
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Frontotemporal activation differs between perception of simulated cochlear implant speech and speech in background noise: An image-based fNIRS study.
    Defenderfer J; Forbes S; Wijeakumar S; Hedrick M; Plyler P; Buss AT
    Neuroimage; 2021 Oct; 240():118385. PubMed ID: 34256138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Speech perception in individuals with auditory neuropathy.
    Zeng FG; Liu S
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Apr; 49(2):367-80. PubMed ID: 16671850
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. [Simulation of speech perception with cochlear implants : Influence of frequency and level of fundamental frequency components with electronic acoustic stimulation].
    Rader T; Fastl H; Baumann U
    HNO; 2017 Mar; 65(3):237-242. PubMed ID: 27670421
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Predicting the intelligibility of vocoded speech.
    Chen F; Loizou PC
    Ear Hear; 2011; 32(3):331-8. PubMed ID: 21206363
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effect of visual cues on top-down restoration of temporally interrupted speech, with and without further degradations.
    Benard MR; Başkent D
    Hear Res; 2015 Oct; 328():24-33. PubMed ID: 26117407
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Time-compression thresholds for Mandarin sentences in normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners.
    Meng Q; Wang X; Cai Y; Kong F; Buck AN; Yu G; Zheng N; Schnupp JWH
    Hear Res; 2019 Mar; 374():58-68. PubMed ID: 30732921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. The effects of binaural spectral resolution mismatch on Mandarin speech perception in simulated electric hearing.
    Chen F; Wong LL; Tahmina Q; Azimi B; Hu Y
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Aug; 132(2):EL142-8. PubMed ID: 22894313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Spectral and temporal cues in cochlear implant speech perception.
    Nie K; Barco A; Zeng FG
    Ear Hear; 2006 Apr; 27(2):208-17. PubMed ID: 16518146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Talker intelligibility differences in cochlear implant listeners.
    Green T; Katiri S; Faulkner A; Rosen S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Jun; 121(6):EL223-9. PubMed ID: 17552573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.