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: 35918501)

  • 1. Stimulation Rate and Voice Pitch Perception in Cochlear Implants.
    Kovačić D; James CJ
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2022 Oct; 23(5):665-680. PubMed ID: 35918501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Pitch and loudness matching of unmodulated and modulated stimuli in cochlear implantees.
    Vandali A; Sly D; Cowan R; van Hoesel R
    Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 302():32-49. PubMed ID: 23685148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Evaluation of the Optimized Pitch and Language Strategy in Cochlear Implant Recipients.
    Vandali A; Dawson P; Au A; Yu Y; Brown M; Goorevich M; Cowan R
    Ear Hear; 2019; 40(3):555-567. PubMed ID: 30067558
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Effects of pulse shape on pitch sensitivity of cochlear implant users.
    Arslan NO; Luo X
    Hear Res; 2024 Sep; 450():109075. PubMed ID: 38986164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Advantages of Pulse Rate Compared to Modulation Frequency for Temporal Pitch Perception in Cochlear Implant Users.
    Goldsworthy RL; Bissmeyer SRS; Camarena A
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2022 Feb; 23(1):137-150. PubMed ID: 34981263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of phase duration and pulse rate on loudness and pitch percepts in the first auditory midbrain implant patients: Comparison to cochlear implant and auditory brainstem implant results.
    Lim HH; Lenarz T; Joseph G; Battmer RD; Patrick JF; Lenarz M
    Neuroscience; 2008 Jun; 154(1):370-80. PubMed ID: 18384971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Pitch Perception With the Temporal Limits Encoder for Cochlear Implants.
    Zhou H; Kan A; Yu G; Guo Z; Zheng N; Meng Q
    IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng; 2022; 30():2528-2539. PubMed ID: 36044501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Rate pitch discrimination in cochlear implant users with the use of double pulses and different interpulse intervals.
    Pieper SH; Bahmer A
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2019 Nov; 20(6):312-323. PubMed ID: 31448701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Speech perception with F0mod, a cochlear implant pitch coding strategy.
    Francart T; Osses A; Wouters J
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Jun; 54(6):424-32. PubMed ID: 25697275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Variations in carrier pulse rate and the perception of amplitude modulation in cochlear implant users.
    Green T; Faulkner A; Rosen S
    Ear Hear; 2012; 33(2):221-30. PubMed ID: 22367093
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Pitch ranking ability of cochlear implant recipients: a comparison of sound-processing strategies.
    Vandali AE; Sucher C; Tsang DJ; McKay CM; Chew JW; McDermott HJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2005 May; 117(5):3126-38. PubMed ID: 15957780
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The role of intensity upon pitch perception in cochlear implant recipients.
    Arnoldner C; Kaider A; Hamzavi J
    Laryngoscope; 2006 Oct; 116(10):1760-5. PubMed ID: 17003738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Effects of stimulation rate with the Nucleus 24 ACE speech coding strategy.
    Holden LK; Skinner MW; Holden TA; Demorest ME
    Ear Hear; 2002 Oct; 23(5):463-76. PubMed ID: 12411779
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Enhancing temporal cues to voice pitch in continuous interleaved sampling cochlear implants.
    Green T; Faulkner A; Rosen S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 Oct; 116(4 Pt 1):2298-310. PubMed ID: 15532661
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Extending the limits of place and temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users.
    Macherey O; Deeks JM; Carlyon RP
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2011 Apr; 12(2):233-51. PubMed ID: 21116672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Pitch perception is more robust to interference and better resolved when provided by pulse rate than by modulation frequency of cochlear implant stimulation.
    Goldsworthy RL; Camarena A; Bissmeyer SRS
    Hear Res; 2021 Sep; 409():108319. PubMed ID: 34340020
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Coding of the fundamental frequency in continuous interleaved sampling processors for cochlear implants.
    Geurts L; Wouters J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Feb; 109(2):713-26. PubMed ID: 11248975
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Dynamic current steering with phantom electrode in cochlear implants.
    Luo X; Garrett C
    Hear Res; 2020 May; 390():107949. PubMed ID: 32200300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Enhancement of temporal cues to pitch in cochlear implants: effects on pitch ranking.
    Vandali AE; van Hoesel RJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Jul; 132(1):392-402. PubMed ID: 22779486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Perception of Mandarin Chinese with cochlear implants using enhanced temporal pitch cues.
    Milczynski M; Chang JE; Wouters J; van Wieringen A
    Hear Res; 2012 Mar; 285(1-2):1-12. PubMed ID: 22361414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 9.