BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31630083)

  • 1. Sequential stream segregation with bilateral cochlear implants.
    Wijetillake AA; van Hoesel RJM; Cowan R
    Hear Res; 2019 Nov; 383():107812. PubMed ID: 31630083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Sequential stream segregation in normally-hearing and cochlear-implant listeners.
    Tejani VD; Schvartz-Leyzac KC; Chatterjee M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jan; 141(1):50. PubMed ID: 28147600
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Binaural cue sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients with acoustic hearing preservation.
    Gifford RH; Stecker GC
    Hear Res; 2020 May; 390():107929. PubMed ID: 32182551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Binaural fusion and listening effort in children who use bilateral cochlear implants: a psychoacoustic and pupillometric study.
    Steel MM; Papsin BC; Gordon KA
    PLoS One; 2015; 10(2):e0117611. PubMed ID: 25668423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Perception and coding of interaural time differences with bilateral cochlear implants.
    Laback B; Egger K; Majdak P
    Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 322():138-50. PubMed ID: 25456088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effect of mismatched place-of-stimulation on binaural fusion and lateralization in bilateral cochlear-implant users.
    Kan A; Stoelb C; Litovsky RY; Goupell MJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Oct; 134(4):2923-36. PubMed ID: 24116428
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Stream segregation on a single electrode as a function of pulse rate in cochlear implant listeners.
    Duran SI; Collins LM; Throckmorton CS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Dec; 132(6):3849-55. PubMed ID: 23231115
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Spatial hearing benefits demonstrated with presentation of acoustic temporal fine structure cues in bilateral cochlear implant listeners.
    Churchill TH; Kan A; Goupell MJ; Litovsky RY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Sep; 136(3):1246. PubMed ID: 25190398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Characterizing the relationship between modulation sensitivity and pitch resolution in cochlear implant users.
    Camarena A; Goldsworthy RL
    Hear Res; 2024 Jul; 448():109026. PubMed ID: 38776706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Music perception improves in children with bilateral cochlear implants or bimodal devices.
    Polonenko MJ; Giannantonio S; Papsin BC; Marsella P; Gordon KA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jun; 141(6):4494. PubMed ID: 28679263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The Role of Temporal Cues in Voluntary Stream Segregation for Cochlear Implant Users.
    Paredes-Gallardo A; Madsen SMK; Dau T; Marozeau J
    Trends Hear; 2018; 22():2331216518773226. PubMed ID: 29766759
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Simultaneous masking between electric and acoustic stimulation in cochlear implant users with residual low-frequency hearing.
    Krüger B; Büchner A; Nogueira W
    Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 353():185-196. PubMed ID: 28688755
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Modulation detection interference in cochlear implant listeners under forward masking conditions.
    Chatterjee M; Kulkarni AM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Feb; 143(2):1117. PubMed ID: 29495705
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Rate modulation detection thresholds for cochlear implant users.
    Brochier T; McKay C; McDermott H
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Feb; 143(2):1214. PubMed ID: 29495682
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Internalized elevation perception of simple stimuli in cochlear-implant and normal-hearing listeners.
    Thakkar T; Goupell MJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):841-52. PubMed ID: 25096117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The Relationship Between Intensity Coding and Binaural Sensitivity in Adults With Cochlear Implants.
    Todd AE; Goupell MJ; Litovsky RY
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(2):e128-e141. PubMed ID: 27787393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Spatial and non-spatial multisensory cueing in unilateral cochlear implant users.
    Pavani F; Venturini M; Baruffaldi F; Artesini L; Bonfioli F; Frau GN; van Zoest W
    Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():24-37. PubMed ID: 27810286
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of interaural pitch matching and auditory image centering on binaural sensitivity in cochlear implant users.
    Kan A; Litovsky RY; Goupell MJ
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(3):e62-8. PubMed ID: 25565660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Binaural sensitivity in children who use bilateral cochlear implants.
    Ehlers E; Goupell MJ; Zheng Y; Godar SP; Litovsky RY
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jun; 141(6):4264. PubMed ID: 28618809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.