268 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36620447)
21. List equivalency of the AzBio sentence test in noise for listeners with normal-hearing sensitivity or cochlear implants.
Schafer EC; Pogue J; Milrany T
J Am Acad Audiol; 2012; 23(7):501-9. PubMed ID: 22992257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Within- and across-frequency temporal processing and speech perception in cochlear implant users.
Blankenship CM; Meinzen-Derr J; Zhang F
PLoS One; 2022; 17(10):e0275772. PubMed ID: 36227872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Role of semantic context and talker variability in speech perception of cochlear-implant users and normal-hearing listeners.
O'Neill ER; Parke MN; Kreft HA; Oxenham AJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2021 Feb; 149(2):1224. PubMed ID: 33639827
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Enhanced audio-visual interactions in the auditory cortex of elderly cochlear-implant users.
Schierholz I; Finke M; Schulte S; Hauthal N; Kantzke C; Rach S; Büchner A; Dengler R; Sandmann P
Hear Res; 2015 Oct; 328():133-47. PubMed ID: 26302946
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. More Than Words: the Relative Roles of Prosody and Semantics in the Perception of Emotions in Spoken Language by Postlingual Cochlear Implant Users.
Taitelbaum-Swead R; Icht M; Ben-David BM
Ear Hear; 2022 Jul-Aug 01; 43(4):1378-1389. PubMed ID: 35030551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Consequences of Stimulus Type on Higher-Order Processing in Single-Sided Deaf Cochlear Implant Users.
Finke M; Sandmann P; Bönitz H; Kral A; Büchner A
Audiol Neurootol; 2016; 21(5):305-315. PubMed ID: 27866186
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Assessment of High-variability Speech Recognition in Adult Cochlear Implant Users using PRESTO.
Tamati TN; Faulkner KF; Pisoni D
J Am Acad Audiol; 2023 Sep; ():. PubMed ID: 37748726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Effects of attention on the speech reception threshold and pupil response of people with impaired and normal hearing.
Koelewijn T; Versfeld NJ; Kramer SE
Hear Res; 2017 Oct; 354():56-63. PubMed ID: 28869841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Cortical auditory evoked potentials in cochlear implant listeners via single electrode stimulation in relation to speech perception.
Liebscher T; Alberter K; Hoppe U
Int J Audiol; 2018 Dec; 57(12):933-940. PubMed ID: 30295156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Distinct multisensory perceptual processes guide enhanced auditory recognition memory in older cochlear implant users.
Radecke JO; Schierholz I; Kral A; Lenarz T; Murray MM; Sandmann P
Neuroimage Clin; 2022; 33():102942. PubMed ID: 35033811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. Effects of sensorineural hearing loss on cortical event-related potential and behavioral measures of speech-sound processing.
Oates PA; Kurtzberg D; Stapells DR
Ear Hear; 2002 Oct; 23(5):399-415. PubMed ID: 12411773
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Recovery function of the late auditory evoked potential in cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners.
Zhang F; Samy RN; Anderson JM; Houston L
J Am Acad Audiol; 2009; 20(7):397-408. PubMed ID: 19928394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. The P300 Auditory Event-Related Potential May Predict Segregation of Competing Speech by Bimodal Cochlear Implant Listeners.
Tao DD; Zhang YM; Liu H; Zhang W; Xu M; Galvin JJ; Zhang D; Liu JS
Front Neurosci; 2022; 16():888596. PubMed ID: 35757527
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Effects of noise and noise reduction on audiovisual speech perception in cochlear implant users: An ERP study.
Layer N; Abdel-Latif KHA; Radecke JO; Müller V; Weglage A; Lang-Roth R; Walger M; Sandmann P
Clin Neurophysiol; 2023 Oct; 154():141-156. PubMed ID: 37611325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Factors affecting speech understanding in gated interference: cochlear implant users and normal-hearing listeners.
Nelson PB; Jin SH
J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 May; 115(5 Pt 1):2286-94. PubMed ID: 15139640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Meta-Analysis on the Identification of Linguistic and Emotional Prosody in Cochlear Implant Users and Vocoder Simulations.
Everhardt MK; Sarampalis A; Coler M; Başkent D; Lowie W
Ear Hear; 2020; 41(5):1092-1102. PubMed ID: 32251011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. HEARING, PSYCHOPHYSICS, AND COCHLEAR IMPLANTATION: EXPERIENCES OF OLDER INDIVIDUALS WITH MILD SLOPING TO PROFOUND SENSORY HEARING LOSS.
Gifford RH; Dorman MF; Brown C; Spahr AJ
J Hear Sci; 2012 Dec; 2(4):9-17. PubMed ID: 24319590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. BKB-SIN and ANL predict perceived communication ability in cochlear implant users.
Donaldson GS; Chisolm TH; Blasco GP; Shinnick LJ; Ketter KJ; Krause JC
Ear Hear; 2009 Aug; 30(4):401-10. PubMed ID: 19390441
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Listening in Noise Remains a Significant Challenge for Cochlear Implant Users: Evidence from Early Deafened and Those with Progressive Hearing Loss Compared to Peers with Normal Hearing.
Zaltz Y; Bugannim Y; Zechoval D; Kishon-Rabin L; Perez R
J Clin Med; 2020 May; 9(5):. PubMed ID: 32397101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
