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 *

179 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33719538)

  • 41. Speech perception for adults who use hearing aids in conjunction with cochlear implants in opposite ears.
    Mok M; Grayden D; Dowell RC; Lawrence D
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2006 Apr; 49(2):338-51. PubMed ID: 16671848
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Frequency Following Response and Speech Recognition Benefit for Combining a Cochlear Implant and Contralateral Hearing Aid.
    Kessler DM; Ananthakrishnan S; Smith SB; D'Onofrio K; Gifford RH
    Trends Hear; 2020; 24():2331216520902001. PubMed ID: 32003296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. A Longitudinal Comparison of Environmental Sound Recognition in Adults With Hearing Aids Before and After Cochlear Implantation.
    Harris MS; Moberly AC; Hamel BL; Vasil K; Runge CL; Riggs WJ; Shafiro V
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2021 Mar; 64(3):1040-1052. PubMed ID: 33651956
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Spectral-ripple resolution correlates with speech reception in noise in cochlear implant users.
    Won JH; Drennan WR; Rubinstein JT
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2007 Sep; 8(3):384-92. PubMed ID: 17587137
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. 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]  

  • 46. The contribution of a frequency-compression hearing aid to contralateral cochlear implant performance.
    Perreau AE; Bentler RA; Tyler RS
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Feb; 24(2):105-20. PubMed ID: 23357804
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. What to Do When Cochlear Implant Users Plateau in Performance: a Pilot Study of Clinician-guided Aural Rehabilitation.
    Moberly AC; Vasil K; Baxter J; Ray C
    Otol Neurotol; 2018 Oct; 39(9):e794-e802. PubMed ID: 30199497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Use of Direct-Connect for Remote Speech-Perception Testing in Cochlear Implants.
    Sevier JD; Choi S; Hughes ML
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(5):1162-1173. PubMed ID: 30640730
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Should children who use cochlear implants wear hearing aids in the opposite ear?
    Ching TY; Psarros C; Hill M; Dillon H; Incerti P
    Ear Hear; 2001 Oct; 22(5):365-80. PubMed ID: 11605945
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Direct Acoustic Cochlear Implants Lead to an Improved Speech Perception Gap Compared to Conventional Hearing Aid.
    Maier H; Lenarz T; Dolležal LV; Busch S
    Otol Neurotol; 2018 Oct; 39(9):1147-1152. PubMed ID: 30106855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Effects of electrode deactivation on speech recognition in multichannel cochlear implant recipients.
    Schvartz-Leyzac KC; Zwolan TA; Pfingst BE
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2017 Nov; 18(6):324-334. PubMed ID: 28793847
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Outcomes in Patients Meeting Cochlear Implant Criteria in Noise but Not in Quiet.
    Thai A; Tran E; Swanson A; Fitzgerald MB; Blevins NH; Ma Y; Smith ML; Larky JB; Alyono JC
    Otol Neurotol; 2022 Jan; 43(1):56-63. PubMed ID: 34889839
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. A directional remote-microphone for bimodal cochlear implant recipients.
    Vroegop JL; Homans NC; Goedegebure A; van der Schroeff MP
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Nov; 57(11):858-863. PubMed ID: 30261771
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Microphone directionality, pre-emphasis filter, and wind noise in cochlear implants.
    Chung K; McKibben N
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2011 Oct; 22(9):586-600. PubMed ID: 22192604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Aligning Hearing Aid and Cochlear Implant Improves Hearing Outcome in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users.
    Holtmann LC; Janosi A; Bagus H; Scholz T; Lang S; Arweiler-Harbeck D; Hans S
    Otol Neurotol; 2020 Dec; 41(10):1350-1356. PubMed ID: 32810012
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. 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]  

  • 57. Dynamic Current Focusing Compared to Monopolar Stimulation in a Take-Home Trial of Cochlear Implant Users.
    van Groesen NRA; Briaire JJ; de Jong MAM; Frijns JHM
    Ear Hear; 2023 Mar-Apr 01; 44(2):306-317. PubMed ID: 36279119
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Frequency change detection and speech perception in cochlear implant users.
    Zhang F; Underwood G; McGuire K; Liang C; Moore DR; Fu QJ
    Hear Res; 2019 Aug; 379():12-20. PubMed ID: 31035223
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Beyond Sentence Recognition in Quiet for Older Adults: Implications for Cochlear Implant Candidacy.
    Zhang E; Coelho DH
    Otol Neurotol; 2018 Sep; 39(8):979-986. PubMed ID: 29912832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. 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]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.