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 *

233 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36182279)

  • 21. Impact of room acoustic parameters on speech and music perception among participants with cochlear implants.
    Eurich B; Klenzner T; Oehler M
    Hear Res; 2019 Jun; 377():122-132. PubMed ID: 30933704
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Perception of musical timbre by cochlear implant listeners: a multidimensional scaling study.
    Macherey O; Delpierre A
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(4):426-36. PubMed ID: 23334356
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. The Effect of Residual Acoustic Hearing and Adaptation to Uncertainty on Speech Perception in Cochlear Implant Users: Evidence From Eye-Tracking.
    McMurray B; Farris-Trimble A; Seedorff M; Rigler H
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(1):e37-51. PubMed ID: 26317298
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Top-Down Processes in Simulated Electric-Acoustic Hearing: The Effect of Linguistic Context on Bimodal Benefit for Temporally Interrupted Speech.
    Oh SH; Donaldson GS; Kong YY
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(5):582-92. PubMed ID: 27007220
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Listeners' perception of lexical stress in the first words of infants with cochlear implants and normally hearing infants.
    De Clerck I; Verhoeven J; Gillis S; Pettinato M; Gillis S
    J Commun Disord; 2019; 80():52-65. PubMed ID: 31078023
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Reverberation Degrades Pitch Perception but Not Mandarin Tone and Vowel Recognition of Cochlear Implant Users.
    Xu L; Luo J; Xie D; Chao X; Wang R; Zahorik P; Luo X
    Ear Hear; 2022 Jul-Aug 01; 43(4):1139-1150. PubMed ID: 34799495
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Effects of age on F0 discrimination and intonation perception in simulated electric and electroacoustic hearing.
    Souza P; Arehart K; Miller CW; Muralimanohar RK
    Ear Hear; 2011 Feb; 32(1):75-83. PubMed ID: 20739892
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. The Acoustics of Word-Initial Fricatives and Their Effect on Word-Level Intelligibility in Children With Bilateral Cochlear Implants.
    Reidy PF; Kristensen K; Winn MB; Litovsky RY; Edwards JR
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(1):42-56. PubMed ID: 27556521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Effects of Age and Cochlear Implantation on Spectrally Cued Speech Categorization.
    DiNino M; Arenberg JG; Duchen ALR; Winn MB
    J Speech Lang Hear Res; 2020 Jul; 63(7):2425-2440. PubMed ID: 32552327
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Binaural cue sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients with acoustic hearing preservation.
    Gifford RH; Stecker GC
    Hear Res; 2020 May; 390():107929. PubMed ID: 32182551
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Using prosody to infer discourse prominence in cochlear-implant users and normal-hearing listeners.
    Huang YT; Newman RS; Catalano A; Goupell MJ
    Cognition; 2017 Sep; 166():184-200. PubMed ID: 28578222
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. The use of acoustic cues for phonetic identification: effects of spectral degradation and electric hearing.
    Winn MB; Chatterjee M; Idsardi WJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Feb; 131(2):1465-79. PubMed ID: 22352517
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Perceptual weighting of acoustic cues for accommodating gender-related talker differences heard by listeners with normal hearing and with cochlear implants.
    Winn MB; Moore AN
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2020 Aug; 148(2):496. PubMed ID: 32873011
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Auditory Discrimination of Lexical Stress Patterns in Hearing-Impaired Infants with Cochlear Implants Compared with Normal Hearing: Influence of Acoustic Cues and Listening Experience to the Ambient Language.
    Segal O; Houston D; Kishon-Rabin L
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(2):225-34. PubMed ID: 26627470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Melodic interval perception with acoustic and electric hearing in bimodal and single-sided deaf cochlear implant listeners.
    Spitzer ER; Galvin JJ; Friedmann DR; Landsberger DM
    Hear Res; 2021 Feb; 400():108136. PubMed ID: 33310263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Music perception by cochlear implant and normal hearing listeners as measured by the Montreal Battery for Evaluation of Amusia.
    Cooper WB; Tobey E; Loizou PC
    Ear Hear; 2008 Aug; 29(4):618-26. PubMed ID: 18469714
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Low-frequency fine-structure cues allow for the online use of lexical stress during spoken-word recognition in spectrally degraded speech.
    Kong YY; Jesse A
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 Jan; 141(1):373. PubMed ID: 28147573
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Speech intonation and melodic contour recognition in children with cochlear implants and with normal hearing.
    See RL; Driscoll VD; Gfeller K; Kliethermes S; Oleson J
    Otol Neurotol; 2013 Apr; 34(3):490-8. PubMed ID: 23442568
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Temporal Fine Structure Processing, Pitch, and Speech Perception in Adult Cochlear Implant Recipients.
    Dincer D'Alessandro H; Ballantyne D; Boyle PJ; De Seta E; DeVincentiis M; Mancini P
    Ear Hear; 2018; 39(4):679-686. PubMed ID: 29194080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Integration of fundamental frequency and voice-onset-time to voicing categorization: Listeners with normal hearing and bimodal hearing configurations.
    Buz E; Dwyer NC; Lai W; Watson DG; Gifford RH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2023 Mar; 153(3):1580. PubMed ID: 37002096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.