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 *

249 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29242894)

  • 21. Delayed Lexical Access and Cascading Effects on Spreading Semantic Activation During Spoken Word Recognition in Children With Hearing Aids and Cochlear Implants: Evidence From Eye-Tracking.
    Klein KE; Walker EA; McMurray B
    Ear Hear; 2023 Mar-Apr 01; 44(2):338-357. PubMed ID: 36253909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Nonverbal Reasoning as a Contributor to Sentence Recognition Outcomes in Adults With Cochlear Implants.
    Mattingly JK; Castellanos I; Moberly AC
    Otol Neurotol; 2018 Dec; 39(10):e956-e963. PubMed ID: 30444843
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. More Than Words: the Relative Roles of Prosody and Semantics in the Perception of Emotions in Spoken Language by Postlingual Cochlear Implant Users.
    Taitelbaum-Swead R; Icht M; Ben-David BM
    Ear Hear; 2022 Jul-Aug 01; 43(4):1378-1389. PubMed ID: 35030551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Emotion and Word Recognition for Unprocessed and Vocoded Speech Stimuli.
    Morgan SD; Garrard S; Hoskins T
    Ear Hear; 2022; 43(2):398-407. PubMed ID: 34310412
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Memory Span for Spoken Digits in Adults With Cochlear Implants or Typical Hearing: Effects of Age and Identification Ability.
    Cleary M; Wilkinson T; Wilson L; Goupell MJ
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2018 Aug; 61(8):2099-2114. PubMed ID: 30073267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. The Effect of Residual Acoustic Hearing and Adaptation to Uncertainty on Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users: Evidence From Eye-Tracking.
    McMurray B; Farris-Trimble A; Seedorff M; Rigler H
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(1):e37-51. PubMed ID: 26317298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Perception of musical timbre by cochlear implant listeners: a multidimensional scaling study.
    Macherey O; Delpierre A
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(4):426-36. PubMed ID: 23334356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Accuracy and cue use in word segmentation for cochlear-implant listeners and normal-hearing listeners presented vocoded speech.
    Heffner CC; Jaekel BN; Newman RS; Goupell MJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2021 Oct; 150(4):2936. PubMed ID: 34717484
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Children With Cochlear Implants Use Semantic Prediction to Facilitate Spoken Word Recognition.
    Blomquist C; Newman RS; Huang YT; Edwards J
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2021 May; 64(5):1636-1649. PubMed ID: 33887149
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The Acoustics of Word-Initial Fricatives and Their Effect on Word-Level Intelligibility in Children With Bilateral Cochlear Implants.
    Reidy PF; Kristensen K; Winn MB; Litovsky RY; Edwards JR
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(1):42-56. PubMed ID: 27556521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Word Recognition Variability With Cochlear Implants: "Perceptual Attention" Versus "Auditory Sensitivity".
    Moberly AC; Lowenstein JH; Nittrouer S
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(1):14-26. PubMed ID: 26301844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The Role of Early Intact Auditory Experience on the Perception of Spoken Emotions, Comparing Prelingual to Postlingual Cochlear Implant Users.
    Taitelbaum-Swead R; Ben-David BM
    Ear Hear; 2024 Jul; ():. PubMed ID: 39004788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. The Use of Prosodic Cues in Sentence Processing by Prelingually Deaf Users of Cochlear Implants.
    Holt CM; Demuth K; Yuen I
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(4):e256-62. PubMed ID: 26656191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. How Do You Deal With Uncertainty? Cochlear Implant Users Differ in the Dynamics of Lexical Processing of Noncanonical Inputs.
    McMurray B; Ellis TP; Apfelbaum KS
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(4):961-980. PubMed ID: 30531260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. The effect of temporal gap identification on speech perception by users of cochlear implants.
    Sagi E; Kaiser AR; Meyer TA; Svirsky MA
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2009 Apr; 52(2):385-95. PubMed ID: 18806216
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Using speech sounds to test functional spectral resolution in listeners with cochlear implants.
    Winn MB; Litovsky RY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2015 Mar; 137(3):1430-42. PubMed ID: 25786954
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Effects of cooperating and conflicting cues on speech intonation recognition by cochlear implant users and normal hearing listeners.
    Peng SC; Lu N; Chatterjee M
    Audiol Neurootol; 2009; 14(5):327-37. PubMed ID: 19372651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Divided listening in the free field becomes asymmetric when acoustic cues are limited.
    Fumero MJ; Marrufo-Pérez MI; Eustaquio-Martín A; Lopez-Poveda EA
    Hear Res; 2022 Mar; 416():108444. PubMed ID: 35078133
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Top-Down Processes in Simulated Electric-Acoustic Hearing: The Effect of Linguistic Context on Bimodal Benefit for Temporally Interrupted Speech.
    Oh SH; Donaldson GS; Kong YY
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(5):582-92. PubMed ID: 27007220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Acoustic and semantic enhancements for children with cochlear implants.
    Smiljanic R; Sladen D
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 56(4):1085-96. PubMed ID: 23785186
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.