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 *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 37622538)

  • 41. Benefits of a Hearing Registry: Cochlear Implant Candidacy in Quiet Versus Noise in 1,611 Patients.
    Dunn C; Miller SE; Schafer EC; Silva C; Gifford RH; Grisel JJ
    Am J Audiol; 2020 Dec; 29(4):851-861. PubMed ID: 32966101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Speech perception in noise by monolingual, bilingual and trilingual listeners.
    Tabri D; Abou Chacra KM; Pring T
    Int J Lang Commun Disord; 2011; 46(4):411-22. PubMed ID: 21771217
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. Benefit of a commercially available cochlear implant processor with dual-microphone beamforming: a multi-center study.
    Wolfe J; Parkinson A; Schafer EC; Gilden J; Rehwinkel K; Mansanares J; Coughlan E; Wright J; Torres J; Gannaway S
    Otol Neurotol; 2012 Jun; 33(4):553-60. PubMed ID: 22588233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Further Evidence for the Expansion of Adult Cochlear Implant Candidacy Criteria.
    Perkins E; Dietrich MS; Manzoor N; O'Malley M; Bennett M; Rivas A; Haynes D; Labadie R; Gifford R
    Otol Neurotol; 2021 Jul; 42(6):815-823. PubMed ID: 33606469
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Investigating the Minimal Clinically Important Difference for AzBio and CNC Speech Recognition Scores.
    Patro A; Moberly AC; Freeman MH; Perkins EL; Jan TA; Tawfik KO; O'Malley MR; Bennett ML; Gifford RH; Haynes DS; Chowdhury NI
    Otol Neurotol; 2024 Oct; 45(9):e639-e643. PubMed ID: 39264921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Development and Evaluation of a Language-Independent Test of Auditory Discrimination for Referrals for Cochlear Implant Candidacy Assessment.
    Ching TYC; Dillon H; Hou S; Seeto M; Sodan A; Chong-White N
    Ear Hear; 2022 Jul-Aug 01; 43(4):1151-1163. PubMed ID: 34812793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. The Impact of Age on Noise Sensitivity in Cochlear Implant Recipients.
    Shew MA; Herzog JA; Kallogjeri D; Chen S; Wick C; Durakovic N; McJunkin J; Buchman CA;
    Otol Neurotol; 2022 Jan; 43(1):72-79. PubMed ID: 34889840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Speech perception performance as a function of age at implantation among postlingually deaf adult cochlear implant recipients.
    Mahmoud AF; Ruckenstein MJ
    Otol Neurotol; 2014 Dec; 35(10):e286-91. PubMed ID: 25226375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. Determining cochlear implant users' true noise tolerance: use of speech reception threshold in noise testing.
    Poissant SF; Bero EM; Busekroos L; Shao W
    Otol Neurotol; 2014 Mar; 35(3):414-20. PubMed ID: 24518402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. Functional benefits of sequential bilateral cochlear implantation in children with long inter-stage interval between two implants.
    Kim JS; Kim LS; Jeong SW
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2013 Feb; 77(2):162-9. PubMed ID: 23137855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Effects of Simulated Hearing Loss on Bilingual Children's Consonant Recognition in Noise.
    Nishi K; Trevino AC; Rosado Rogers L; García P; Neely ST
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(5):e292-e304. PubMed ID: 28353522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Phoneme Error Pattern by Heritage Speakers of Spanish on an English Word Recognition Test.
    Shi LF
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2017 Apr; 28(4):352-365. PubMed ID: 28418329
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. Changes in speech intelligibility of postlingually deaf adults after cochlear implantation.
    Gould J; Lane H; Vick J; Perkell JS; Matthies ML; Zandipour M
    Ear Hear; 2001 Dec; 22(6):453-60. PubMed ID: 11770668
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Predictive Ability of First-Side Cochlear Implant Performance in Adult Sequential Bilateral Cochlear Implantation.
    Quimby AE; Wen CZ; Bigelow DC; Ruckenstein MJ; Brant JA
    Otol Neurotol; 2023 Feb; 44(2):141-147. PubMed ID: 36624591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Long-term speech perception in elderly cochlear implant users.
    Dillon MT; Buss E; Adunka MC; King ER; Pillsbury HC; Adunka OF; Buchman CA
    JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2013 Mar; 139(3):279-83. PubMed ID: 23657352
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. Relationship Between Speech Recognition in Quiet and Noise and Fitting Parameters, Impedances and ECAP Thresholds in Adult Cochlear Implant Users.
    de Graaff F; Lissenberg-Witte BI; Kaandorp MW; Merkus P; Goverts ST; Kramer SE; Smits C
    Ear Hear; 2020; 41(4):935-947. PubMed ID: 31702597
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Does Auditory Environment Predict Speech Perception Outcomes in Elderly Cochlear Implant Patients?
    Chow K; Kaul VF; Levine-Madoff J; Wanna GB; Cosetti MK
    Audiol Neurootol; 2021; 26(5):378-386. PubMed ID: 33951634
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. Association of Speech Processor Technology and Speech Recognition Outcomes in Adult Cochlear Implant Users.
    Dixon PR; Shipp D; Smilsky K; Lin VY; Le T; Chen JM
    Otol Neurotol; 2019 Jun; 40(5):595-601. PubMed ID: 31083080
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Reception thresholds for sentences in quiet and noise for monolingual English and bilingual Mandarin-English listeners.
    Stuart A; Zhang J; Swink S
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2010 Apr; 21(4):239-48. PubMed ID: 20388450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Cochlear Implant Performance in Candidates With Moderate Hearing Loss Qualifying in Noise.
    Friedland DR; Kozlowski K; Runge CL
    Otol Neurotol; 2021 Dec; 42(10):1484-1491. PubMed ID: 34310553
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.