234 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 35394798)
1. Effect of Place-Based Versus Default Mapping Procedures on Masked Speech Recognition: Simulations of Cochlear Implant Alone and Electric-Acoustic Stimulation.
Dillon MT; O'Connell BP; Canfarotta MW; Buss E; Hopfinger J
Am J Audiol; 2022 Jun; 31(2):322-337. PubMed ID: 35394798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of Two Place-Based Mapping Procedures on Masked Sentence Recognition as a Function of Electrode Array Angular Insertion Depth and Presence of Acoustic Low-Frequency Information: A Simulation Study.
Dillon MT; Buss E; Johnson AD; Canfarotta MW; O'Connell BP
Audiol Neurootol; 2023; 28(6):478-487. PubMed ID: 37482054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effectiveness of Place-based Mapping in Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Devices.
Dillon MT; Canfarotta MW; Buss E; Hopfinger J; O'Connell BP
Otol Neurotol; 2021 Jan; 42(1):197-202. PubMed ID: 33885267
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Influence of Electric Frequency-to-Place Mismatches on the Early Speech Recognition Outcomes for Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Users.
Dillon MT; Canfarotta MW; Buss E; Rooth MA; Richter ME; Overton AB; Roth NE; Dillon SM; Raymond JH; Young A; Pearson AC; Davis AG; Dedmon MM; Brown KD; O'Connell BP
Am J Audiol; 2023 Mar; 32(1):251-260. PubMed ID: 36800505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Frequency-to-Place Mismatch: Characterizing Variability and the Influence on Speech Perception Outcomes in Cochlear Implant Recipients.
Canfarotta MW; Dillon MT; Buss E; Pillsbury HC; Brown KD; O'Connell BP
Ear Hear; 2020; 41(5):1349-1361. PubMed ID: 32205726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Influence of the Frequency-to-Place Function on Recognition with Place-Based Cochlear Implant Maps.
Dillon MT; Helpard L; Brown KD; Selleck AM; Richter ME; Rooth MA; Thompson NJ; Dedmon MM; Ladak HM; Agrawal S
Laryngoscope; 2023 Dec; 133(12):3540-3547. PubMed ID: 37078508
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Cochlear implant spectral bandwidth for optimizing electric and acoustic stimulation (EAS).
Gifford RH; Sunderhaus LW; Dawant BM; Labadie RF; Noble JH
Hear Res; 2022 Dec; 426():108584. PubMed ID: 35985964
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. Speech Perception With Combined Electric-Acoustic Stimulation: A Simulation and Model Comparison.
Rader T; Adel Y; Fastl H; Baumann U
Ear Hear; 2015; 36(6):e314-25. PubMed ID: 25989069
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Phantom Stimulation for Cochlear Implant Users With Residual Low-Frequency Hearing.
Krüger B; Büchner A; Nogueira W
Ear Hear; 2022; 43(2):631-645. PubMed ID: 34593687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Incidence of Cochlear Implant Electrode Contacts in the Functional Acoustic Hearing Region and the Influence on Speech Recognition with Electric-Acoustic Stimulation.
Nix EP; Thompson NJ; Brown KD; Dedmon MM; Selleck AM; Overton AB; Canfarotta MW; Dillon MT
Otol Neurotol; 2023 Dec; 44(10):1004-1010. PubMed ID: 37758328
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effects of the Configuration of Hearing Loss on Consonant Perception between Simulated Bimodal and Electric Acoustic Stimulation Hearing.
Yoon YS; Whitaker G; Lee YS
J Am Acad Audiol; 2021 Sep; 32(8):521-527. PubMed ID: 34965598
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of Speech Recognition With an Organ of Corti Versus Spiral Ganglion Frequency-to-Place Function in Place-Based Mapping of Cochlear Implant and Electric-Acoustic Stimulation Devices.
Dillon MT; Canfarotta MW; Buss E; O'Connell BP
Otol Neurotol; 2021 Jun; 42(5):721-725. PubMed ID: 33625196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. Assessing the Quality of Low-Frequency Acoustic Hearing: Implications for Combined Electroacoustic Stimulation With Cochlear Implants.
Spitzer ER; Landsberger DM; Friedmann DR
Ear Hear; 2021; 42(2):475-486. PubMed ID: 32976249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Electric-Acoustic Stimulation After Reimplantation: Hearing Preservation and Speech Perception.
Thompson NJ; Dillon MT; Bucker AL; King ER; Pillsbury HC; Brown KD
Otol Neurotol; 2019 Feb; 40(2):e94-e98. PubMed ID: 30624400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Benefits to Speech Perception in Noise From the Binaural Integration of Electric and Acoustic Signals in Simulated Unilateral Deafness.
Ma N; Morris S; Kitterick PT
Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):248-59. PubMed ID: 27116049
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Early Sentence Recognition in Adult Cochlear Implant Users.
James CJ; Karoui C; Laborde ML; Lepage B; Molinier CÉ; Tartayre M; Escudé B; Deguine O; Marx M; Fraysse B
Ear Hear; 2019; 40(4):905-917. PubMed ID: 30335668
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
