212 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32576247)
1. Evaluating hearing performance with cochlear implants within the same patient using daily randomization and imaging-based fitting - The ELEPHANT study.
Lambriks LJG; van Hoof M; Debruyne JA; Janssen M; Chalupper J; van der Heijden KA; Hof JR; Hellingman CA; George ELJ; Devocht EMJ
Trials; 2020 Jun; 21(1):564. PubMed ID: 32576247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Imaging-based frequency mapping for cochlear implants - Evaluated using a daily randomized controlled trial.
Lambriks L; van Hoof M; Debruyne J; Janssen M; Chalupper J; van der Heijden K; Hof J; Hellingman K; Devocht E; George E
Front Neurosci; 2023; 17():1119933. PubMed ID: 37123376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. ACEMg-mediated hearing preservation in cochlear implant patients receiving different electrode lengths (PROHEARING): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.
Scheper V; Leifholz M; von der Leyen H; Keller M; Denkena U; Koch A; Karch A; Miller J; Lenarz T
Trials; 2016 Aug; 17():394. PubMed ID: 27502589
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Cochlear implant combined with a linear frequency transposing hearing aid.
Hua H; Johansson B; Jönsson R; Magnusson L
J Am Acad Audiol; 2012 Oct; 23(9):722-32. PubMed ID: 23072964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Speech perception with combined electric-acoustic stimulation and bilateral cochlear implants in a multisource noise field.
Rader T; Fastl H; Baumann U
Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):324-32. PubMed ID: 23263408
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. Preservation of hearing in cochlear implant surgery: advantages of combined electrical and acoustical speech processing.
Gantz BJ; Turner C; Gfeller KE; Lowder MW
Laryngoscope; 2005 May; 115(5):796-802. PubMed ID: 15867642
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Place dependent stimulation rates improve pitch perception in cochlear implantees with single-sided deafness.
Rader T; Döge J; Adel Y; Weissgerber T; Baumann U
Hear Res; 2016 Sep; 339():94-103. PubMed ID: 27374479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Does acoustic fundamental frequency information enhance cochlear implant performance?
Mulhern L; Cullington H
Cochlear Implants Int; 2014 Mar; 15(2):101-8. PubMed ID: 24597637
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Association Between Flat-Panel Computed Tomographic Imaging-Guided Place-Pitch Mapping and Speech and Pitch Perception in Cochlear Implant Users.
Jiam NT; Gilbert M; Cooke D; Jiradejvong P; Barrett K; Caldwell M; Limb CJ
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2019 Feb; 145(2):109-116. PubMed ID: 30477013
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Combined Electric and Acoustic Stimulation With Hearing Preservation: Effect of Cochlear Implant Low-Frequency Cutoff on Speech Understanding and Perceived Listening Difficulty.
Gifford RH; Davis TJ; Sunderhaus LW; Menapace C; Buck B; Crosson J; O'Neill L; Beiter A; Segel P
Ear Hear; 2017; 38(5):539-553. PubMed ID: 28301392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparing the Effect of Different Hearing Aid Fitting Methods in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users.
Vroegop JL; Dingemanse JG; van der Schroeff MP; Goedegebure A
Am J Audiol; 2019 Mar; 28(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 30383163
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Pitch Matching between Electrical Stimulation of a Cochlear Implant and Acoustic Stimuli Presented to a Contralateral Ear with Residual Hearing.
Tan CT; Martin B; Svirsky MA
J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Mar; 28(3):187-199. PubMed ID: 28277210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Revisiting Place-Pitch Match in CI Recipients Using 3D Imaging Analysis.
Devocht EM; Dees G; Arts RA; Smits JJ; George EL; van Hoof M; Stokroos RJ
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 2016 May; 125(5):378-84. PubMed ID: 26631764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Sound Localization and Speech Perception in Noise of Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients: Bimodal Fitting Versus Bilateral Cochlear Implants.
Choi JE; Moon IJ; Kim EY; Park HS; Kim BK; Chung WH; Cho YS; Brown CJ; Hong SH
Ear Hear; 2017; 38(4):426-440. PubMed ID: 28085740
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Combining acoustic and electrical speech processing: Iowa/Nucleus hybrid implant.
Gantz BJ; Turner C
Acta Otolaryngol; 2004 May; 124(4):344-7. PubMed ID: 15224850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Outcome evaluation on cochlear implant users with residual hearing.
Neben N; Buechner A; Schuessler M; Lenarz T
Cochlear Implants Int; 2018 Mar; 19(2):88-99. PubMed ID: 29214896
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 3D-localisation of cochlear implant electrode contacts in relation to anatomical structures from in vivo cone-beam computed tomography.
Sismono F; Leblans M; Mancini L; Veneziano A; Zanini F; Dirckx J; Bernaerts A; de Foer B; Offeciers E; Zarowski A
Hear Res; 2022 Dec; 426():108537. PubMed ID: 35672191
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Comparing Two Hearing Aid Fitting Algorithms for Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users.
Vroegop JL; Homans NC; van der Schroeff MP; Goedegebure A
Ear Hear; 2019; 40(1):98-106. PubMed ID: 29782445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
