116 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 34065802)
1. Integrated Bimodal Fitting for Unilateral CI Users with Residual Contralateral Hearing.
Auletta G; Franzè A; Laria C; Piccolo C; Papa C; Riccardi P; Pisani D; Sarnelli A; Del Vecchio V; Malesci R; Marciano E
Audiol Res; 2021 May; 11(2):200-206. PubMed ID: 34065802
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Evaluation of a novel bimodal fitting formula in Advanced Bionics cochlear implant recipients.
Warren SE; Noelle Dunbar M; Bosworth C; Agrawal S
Cochlear Implants Int; 2020 Nov; 21(6):323-337. PubMed ID: 32664814
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparing NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 in Hearing Aids Fit to Children with Severe or Profound Hearing Loss: Goodness of Fit-to-Targets, Impacts on Predicted Loudness and Speech Intelligibility.
Ching TY; Quar TK; Johnson EE; Newall P; Sharma M
J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Mar; 26(3):260-74. PubMed ID: 25751694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Comparing loudness normalization (IHAFF) with speech intelligibility maximization (NAL-NL1) when implemented in a two-channel device.
Keidser G; Grant F
Ear Hear; 2001 Dec; 22(6):501-15. PubMed ID: 11770672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of hearing aid frequency response fittings in pediatric and young adult bimodal recipients.
Davidson LS; Firszt JB; Brenner C; Cadieux JH
J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Apr; 26(4):393-407. PubMed ID: 25879243
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of real-world preferences and performance of hearing aids fitted according to the NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 procedures in children with moderately severe to profound hearing loss.
Quar TK; Ching TY; Newall P; Sharma M
Int J Audiol; 2013 May; 52(5):322-32. PubMed ID: 23570290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Verification of a Proposed Clinical Electroacoustic Test Protocol for Personal Digital Modulation Receivers Coupled to Cochlear Implant Sound Processors.
Nair EL; Sousa R; Wannagot S
J Am Acad Audiol; 2017; 28(7):625-635. PubMed ID: 28722645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The use of frequency compression by cochlear implant recipients with postoperative acoustic hearing.
McDermott H; Henshall K
J Am Acad Audiol; 2010 Jun; 21(6):380-9. PubMed ID: 20701835
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Matching Automatic Gain Control Across Devices in Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users.
Veugen LC; Chalupper J; Snik AF; Opstal AJ; Mens LH
Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):260-70. PubMed ID: 26656192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effectiveness and efficiency of a dedicated bimodal fitting formula.
Cuda D; Murri A; Mainardi A; Chalupper J
Audiol Res; 2019 May; 9(1):219. PubMed ID: 31183024
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Fitting recommendations and clinical benefit associated with use of the NAL-NL2 hearing-aid prescription in Nucleus cochlear implant recipients.
English R; Plant K; Maciejczyk M; Cowan R
Int J Audiol; 2016; 55 Suppl 2():S45-50. PubMed ID: 26853233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Benefit of the UltraZoom beamforming technology in noise in cochlear implant users.
Mosnier I; Mathias N; Flament J; Amar D; Liagre-Callies A; Borel S; Ambert-Dahan E; Sterkers O; Bernardeschi D
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2017 Sep; 274(9):3335-3342. PubMed ID: 28664331
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. How to Optimally Fit a Hearing Aid for Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users: A Systematic Review.
Vroegop JL; Goedegebure A; van der Schroeff MP
Ear Hear; 2018; 39(6):1039-1045. PubMed ID: 29688963
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Longitudinal outcomes of cochlear implantation and bimodal hearing in a large group of adults: A multicenter clinical study.
Kelsall D; Lupo J; Biever A
Am J Otolaryngol; 2021; 42(1):102773. PubMed ID: 33161258
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Advantages of binaural hearing provided through bimodal stimulation via a cochlear implant and a conventional hearing aid: a 6-month comparative study.
Morera C; Manrique M; Ramos A; Garcia-Ibanez L; Cavalle L; Huarte A; Castillo C; Estrada E
Acta Otolaryngol; 2005 Jun; 125(6):596-606. PubMed ID: 16076708
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Multicentre Evaluation of the Naída CI Q70 Sound Processor: Feedback from Cochlear Implant Users and Professionals.
Martin J; Poncet-Wallet C; Illg A; Perrin-Webb S; Henderson L; Noël-Petroff N; Auletta G; Barezzani MG; Houri K; ; Bagus H; Hoppe U; Humphries J; van Treeck W; Briaire JJ; Brendel M; Mathias N
Audiol Res; 2016 Aug; 6(2):160. PubMed ID: 28217275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Effects of hearing aid settings for electric-acoustic stimulation.
Dillon MT; Buss E; Pillsbury HC; Adunka OF; Buchman CA; Adunka MC
J Am Acad Audiol; 2014 Feb; 25(2):133-40. PubMed ID: 24828214
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
