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 *

279 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33639827)

  • 21. 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]  

  • 22. Assessment of High-variability Speech Recognition in Adult Cochlear Implant Users using PRESTO.
    Tamati TN; Faulkner KF; Pisoni D
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2023 Sep; ():. PubMed ID: 37748726
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Music Is More Enjoyable With Two Ears, Even If One of Them Receives a Degraded Signal Provided By a Cochlear Implant.
    Landsberger DM; Vermeire K; Stupak N; Lavender A; Neukam J; Van de Heyning P; Svirsky MA
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(3):476-490. PubMed ID: 31469701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Test-Retest Reliability of the Coordinate Response Measure in Adults with Normal Hearing or Cochlear Implants.
    Saleh SM; Saeed SR; Vickers D
    Audiol Neurootol; 2023; 28(2):84-93. PubMed ID: 36812898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Recognizing Voices Through a Cochlear Implant: A Systematic Review of Voice Perception, Talker Discrimination, and Talker Identification.
    Colby S; Orena AJ
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2022 Aug; 65(8):3165-3194. PubMed ID: 35926089
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. List equivalency of the AzBio sentence test in noise for listeners with normal-hearing sensitivity or cochlear implants.
    Schafer EC; Pogue J; Milrany T
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2012; 23(7):501-9. PubMed ID: 22992257
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Speech perception in children with cochlear implants: effects of lexical difficulty, talker variability, and word length.
    Kirk KI; Hay-McCutcheon M; Sehgal ST; Miyamoto RT
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 2000 Dec; 185():79-81. PubMed ID: 11141016
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Binaural Optimization of Cochlear Implants: Discarding Frequency Content Without Sacrificing Head-Shadow Benefit.
    Sheffield SW; Goupell MJ; Spencer NJ; Stakhovskaya OA; Bernstein JGW
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(3):576-590. PubMed ID: 31436754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Lexical Access Changes Based on Listener Needs: Real-Time Word Recognition in Continuous Speech in Cochlear Implant Users.
    Smith FX; McMurray B
    Ear Hear; 2022 Sep-Oct 01; 43(5):1487-1501. PubMed ID: 35067570
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Voice Discrimination by Adults with Cochlear Implants: the Benefits of Early Implantation for Vocal-Tract Length Perception.
    Zaltz Y; Goldsworthy RL; Kishon-Rabin L; Eisenberg LS
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2018 Apr; 19(2):193-209. PubMed ID: 29313147
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. How Does Nonverbal Reasoning Affect Sentence Recognition in Adults with Cochlear Implants and Normal-Hearing Peers?
    Moberly AC; Mattingly JK; Castellanos I
    Audiol Neurootol; 2019; 24(3):127-138. PubMed ID: 31266013
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Age-Related Changes in Voice Emotion Recognition by Postlingually Deafened Listeners With Cochlear Implants.
    Cannon SA; Chatterjee M
    Ear Hear; 2022; 43(2):323-334. PubMed ID: 34406157
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Spectral Contrast Effects Reveal Different Acoustic Cues for Vowel Recognition in Cochlear-Implant Users.
    Feng L; Oxenham AJ
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(4):990-997. PubMed ID: 31815819
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Neural Correlates of Individual Differences in Speech-in-Noise Performance in a Large Cohort of Cochlear Implant Users.
    Berger JI; Gander PE; Kim S; Schwalje AT; Woo J; Na YM; Holmes A; Hong JM; Dunn CC; Hansen MR; Gantz BJ; McMurray B; Griffiths TD; Choi I
    Ear Hear; 2023 Sep-Oct 01; 44(5):1107-1120. PubMed ID: 37144890
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Effect of speaking rate on recognition of synthetic and natural speech by normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners.
    Ji C; Galvin JJ; Xu A; Fu QJ
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):313-23. PubMed ID: 23238527
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. High- and Low-Performing Adult Cochlear Implant Users on High-Variability Sentence Recognition: Differences in Auditory Spectral Resolution and Neurocognitive Functioning.
    Tamati TN; Ray C; Vasil KJ; Pisoni DB; Moberly AC
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2020 May; 31(5):324-335. PubMed ID: 31580802
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Transfer of auditory perceptual learning with spectrally reduced speech to speech and nonspeech tasks: implications for cochlear implants.
    Loebach JL; Pisoni DB; Svirsky MA
    Ear Hear; 2009 Dec; 30(6):662-74. PubMed ID: 19773659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Access to semantic cues does not lead to perceptual restoration of interrupted speech in cochlear-implant users.
    Jaekel BN; Weinstein S; Newman RS; Goupell MJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2021 Mar; 149(3):1488. PubMed ID: 33765790
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Effects of age and hearing mechanism on spectral resolution in normal hearing and cochlear-implanted listeners.
    Horn DL; Dudley DJ; Dedhia K; Nie K; Drennan WR; Won JH; Rubinstein JT; Werner LA
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jan; 141(1):613. PubMed ID: 28147578
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Sound localization in noise by normal-hearing listeners and cochlear implant users.
    Kerber S; Seeber BU
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(4):445-57. PubMed ID: 22588270
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 14.