289 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29065731)
1. Optimising the effect of noise reduction algorithm ClearVoice in cochlear implant users by increasing the maximum comfort levels.
Dingemanse JG; Goedegebure A
Int J Audiol; 2018 Mar; 57(3):230-235. PubMed ID: 29065731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Application of Noise Reduction Algorithm ClearVoice in Cochlear Implant Processing: Effects on Noise Tolerance and Speech Intelligibility in Noise in Relation to Spectral Resolution.
Dingemanse JG; Goedegebure A
Ear Hear; 2015; 36(3):357-67. PubMed ID: 25479412
[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. Spectral contrast enhancement improves speech intelligibility in noise for cochlear implants.
Nogueira W; Rode T; Büchner A
J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Feb; 139(2):728-39. PubMed ID: 26936556
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effects of a transient noise reduction algorithm on speech intelligibility in noise, noise tolerance and perceived annoyance in cochlear implant users.
Dingemanse JG; Vroegop JL; Goedegebure A
Int J Audiol; 2018 May; 57(5):360-369. PubMed ID: 29334269
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
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. Speech enhancement based on neural networks improves speech intelligibility in noise for cochlear implant users.
Goehring T; Bolner F; Monaghan JJ; van Dijk B; Zarowski A; Bleeck S
Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():183-194. PubMed ID: 27913315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. The use of cochlear's SCAN and wireless microphones to improve speech understanding in noise with the Nucleus6® CP900 processor.
De Ceulaer G; Pascoal D; Vanpoucke F; Govaerts PJ
Int J Audiol; 2017 Nov; 56(11):837-843. PubMed ID: 28695749
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluation of Speech Recognition of Cochlear Implant Recipients Using Adaptive, Digital Remote Microphone Technology and a Speech Enhancement Sound Processing Algorithm.
Wolfe J; Morais M; Schafer E; Agrawal S; Koch D
J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 May; 26(5):502-508. PubMed ID: 26055839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Two-microphone spatial filtering improves speech reception for cochlear-implant users in reverberant conditions with multiple noise sources.
Goldsworthy RL
Trends Hear; 2014 Oct; 18():. PubMed ID: 25330772
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Pulse-spreading harmonic complex as an alternative carrier for vocoder simulations of cochlear implants.
Mesnildrey Q; Hilkhuysen G; Macherey O
J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Feb; 139(2):986-91. PubMed ID: 26936577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Predicting the speech reception threshold of cochlear implant listeners using an envelope-correlation based measure.
Yousefian N; Loizou PC
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Nov; 132(5):3399-405. PubMed ID: 23145620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Optimizing the perception of soft speech and speech in noise with the Advanced Bionics cochlear implant system.
Holden LK; Reeder RM; Firszt JB; Finley CC
Int J Audiol; 2011 Apr; 50(4):255-69. PubMed ID: 21275500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A beamformer post-filter for cochlear implant noise reduction.
Hersbach AA; Grayden DB; Fallon JB; McDermott HJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Apr; 133(4):2412-20. PubMed ID: 23556606
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Factors constraining the benefit to speech understanding of combining information from low-frequency hearing and a cochlear implant.
Dorman MF; Cook S; Spahr A; Zhang T; Loiselle L; Schramm D; Whittingham J; Gifford R
Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 322():107-11. PubMed ID: 25285624
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
