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.
101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31946246)
1. An Investigation of Audibility Effects on Cochlear Implant Speech Perception Prediction. Watkins GD; Swanson BA; Suaning GJ Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2019 Jul; 2019():1801-1804. PubMed ID: 31946246 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. An Evaluation of Output Signal to Noise Ratio as a Predictor of Cochlear Implant Speech Intelligibility. Watkins GD; Swanson BA; Suaning GJ Ear Hear; 2018; 39(5):958-968. PubMed ID: 29474218 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Prediction of Individual Cochlear Implant Recipient Speech Perception With the Output Signal to Noise Ratio Metric. Watkins GD; Swanson BA; Suaning GJ Ear Hear; 2020; 41(5):1270-1281. PubMed ID: 32053546 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. An Investigation of the Effect of AGC Gain on the Output Signal to Noise Ratio in Cochlear Implant Sound Processing. Watkins GD; Swanson BA; Suaning GJ Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2018 Jul; 2018():1206-1209. PubMed ID: 30440606 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Evaluation of a New Algorithm to Optimize Audibility in Cochlear Implant Recipients. Holden LK; Firszt JB; Reeder RM; Dwyer NY; Stein AL; Litvak LM Ear Hear; 2019; 40(4):990-1000. PubMed ID: 30418283 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Benefits of Adaptive Signal Processing in a Commercially Available Cochlear Implant Sound Processor. Wolfe J; Neumann S; Marsh M; Schafer E; Lianos L; Gilden J; O'Neill L; Arkis P; Menapace C; Nel E; Jones M Otol Neurotol; 2015 Aug; 36(7):1181-90. PubMed ID: 26049314 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A multicentre clinical evaluation of paediatric cochlear implant users upgrading to the Nucleus(®) 6 system. Plasmans A; Rushbrooke E; Moran M; Spence C; Theuwis L; Zarowski A; Offeciers E; Atkinson B; McGovern J; Dornan D; Leigh J; Kaicer A; Hollow R; Martelli L; Looi V; Nel E; Del Dot J; Cowan R; Mauger SJ Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2016 Apr; 83():193-9. PubMed ID: 26968076 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Electromagnetic versus electrical coupling of personal frequency modulation (FM) receivers to cochlear implant sound processors. Schafer EC; Romine D; Musgrave E; Momin S; Huynh C J Am Acad Audiol; 2013; 24(10):927-40. PubMed ID: 24384079 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Conversion of adult Nucleus® 5 cochlear implant users to the Nucleus® 6 system. De Ceulaer G; Swinnen F; Pascoal D; Philips B; Killian M; James C; Govaerts PJ; Dhooge I Cochlear Implants Int; 2015 Jul; 16(4):222-32. PubMed ID: 25284643 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effects of Threshold Adjustment on Speech Perception in Nucleus Cochlear Implant Recipients. Busby PA; Arora K Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):303-11. PubMed ID: 26671316 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Improving Hearing Performance for Cochlear Implant Recipients with Use of a Digital, Wireless, Remote-Microphone, Audio-Streaming Accessory. Wolfe J; Morais M; Schafer E J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Jun; 26(6):532-9. PubMed ID: 26134720 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Deep Learning-Based Noise Reduction Approach to Improve Speech Intelligibility for Cochlear Implant Recipients. Lai YH; Tsao Y; Lu X; Chen F; Su YT; Chen KC; Chen YH; Chen LC; Po-Hung Li L; Lee CH Ear Hear; 2018; 39(4):795-809. PubMed ID: 29360687 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Benefits of bilateral electrical stimulation with the nucleus cochlear implant in adults: 6-month postoperative results. Laszig R; Aschendorff A; Stecker M; Müller-Deile J; Maune S; Dillier N; Weber B; Hey M; Begall K; Lenarz T; Battmer RD; Böhm M; Steffens T; Strutz J; Linder T; Probst R; Allum J; Westhofen M; Doering W Otol Neurotol; 2004 Nov; 25(6):958-68. PubMed ID: 15547426 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of speech reception threshold in noise in young Cochlear™ Nucleus Razza S; Zaccone M; Meli A; Cristofari E Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2017 Dec; 103():71-75. PubMed ID: 29224769 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Improving speech perception in noise for children with cochlear implants. Gifford RH; Olund AP; DeJong M J Am Acad Audiol; 2011 Oct; 22(9):623-632. PubMed ID: 22192607 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A clinical assessment of cochlear implant recipient performance: implications for individualized map settings in specific environments. Hey M; Hocke T; Mauger S; Müller-Deile J Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2016 Nov; 273(11):4011-4020. PubMed ID: 27276990 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. Subjective assessment of cochlear implant users' signal-to-noise ratio requirements for different levels of wireless device usability. Julstrom S; Kozma-Spytek L J Am Acad Audiol; 2014; 25(10):952-68. PubMed ID: 25514448 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Clinical Outcomes of the Cochlear™ Nucleus(®) 5 Cochlear Implant System and SmartSound™ 2 Signal Processing. Runge CL; Henion K; Tarima S; Beiter A; Zwolan TA J Am Acad Audiol; 2016 Jun; 27(6):425-440. PubMed ID: 27310402 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]