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 *

98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7668660)

  • 1. Comparison of two cochlear implant speech processors in better versus poorer performers.
    Cafarelli Dees D; George C; Stevenson F; Sheridan C; Haacke NP
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep; 166():258-60. PubMed ID: 7668660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Speech perception in children using the advanced Speak speech-processing strategy.
    Cowan RS; Brown C; Whitford LA; Galvin KL; Sarant JZ; Barker EJ; Shaw S; King A; Skok M; Seligman PM
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep; 166():318-21. PubMed ID: 7668688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Audiologic results with the MSP/MPEAK and WSP/F0F1F2 processors and coding strategies for the nucleus cochlear implant.
    Pijl S
    J Otolaryngol; 1994 Aug; 23(4):286-91. PubMed ID: 7996630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of speech processing strategies used in the Clarion implant processor.
    Loizou PC; Stickney G; Mishra L; Assmann P
    Ear Hear; 2003 Feb; 24(1):12-9. PubMed ID: 12598809
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Results of speech processor upgrade in a population of Veterans Affairs cochlear implant recipients.
    Cohen NL; Waltzman SB; Roland JT; Bromberg B; Cambron N; Gibbs L; Parkinson W; Snead C
    Am J Otol; 1997 Jul; 18(4):462-5. PubMed ID: 9233486
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Electrodographic analysis and field evaluation of the Speak coding strategy.
    Dillier N; Bögli H; Lai WK
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep; 166():354-6. PubMed ID: 7668703
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Speech perception with the ACE and the SPEAK speech coding strategies for children implanted with the Nucleus cochlear implant.
    Manrique M; Huarte A; Morera C; Caballé L; Ramos A; Castillo C; García-Ibáñez L; Estrada E; Juan E
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2005 Dec; 69(12):1667-74. PubMed ID: 16168497
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. [Noise signal reduction in cochlear implant speech processors].
    Müller-Deile J
    HNO; 1995 Sep; 43(9):545-51. PubMed ID: 7591867
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Performance of older adult cochlear implant users in Hong Kong.
    Chan V; Tong M; Yue V; Wong T; Leung E; Yuen K; van Hasselt A
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2 Suppl):52S-55S. PubMed ID: 17496647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Japanese-language results for the speak strategy from Cochlear Pty Limited.
    Funasaka S; Shiroma M; Yukawa K
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep; 166():265-8. PubMed ID: 7668663
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. A comparison of the growth of open-set speech perception between the nucleus 22 and nucleus 24 cochlear implant systems.
    Waltzman SB; Cohen NL; Roland JT
    Am J Otol; 1999 Jul; 20(4):435-41. PubMed ID: 10431883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evaluation of a new spectral peak coding strategy for the Nucleus 22 Channel Cochlear Implant System.
    Skinner MW; Clark GM; Whitford LA; Seligman PM; Staller SJ; Shipp DB; Shallop JK; Everingham C; Menapace CM; Arndt PL
    Am J Otol; 1994 Nov; 15 Suppl 2():15-27. PubMed ID: 8572106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Performance of the new Clarion speech processor 1.2 in quiet and in noise.
    Battmer RD; Feldmeier I; Kohlenberg A; Lenarz T
    Am J Otol; 1997 Nov; 18(6 Suppl):S144-6. PubMed ID: 9391637
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Speech recognition with a CIS strategy for the ineraid multichannel cochlear implant.
    Boëx C; Pelizzone M; Montandon P
    Am J Otol; 1996 Jan; 17(1):61-8. PubMed ID: 8694136
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effects of FM-receiver gain on speech-recognition performance of adults with cochlear implants.
    Schafer EC; Wolfe J; Lawless T; Stout B
    Int J Audiol; 2009 Apr; 48(4):196-203. PubMed ID: 19363720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Effects of vowel context on the recognition of initial and medial consonants by cochlear implant users.
    Donaldson GS; Kreft HA
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):658-77. PubMed ID: 17086077
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Speech recognition with the MPEAK and SPEAK speech-coding strategies of the Nucleus Cochlear Implant.
    Holden LK; Skinner MW; Holden TA
    Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 1997 Feb; 116(2):163-7. PubMed ID: 9051058
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Electrophysiological and speech perception measures of auditory processing in experienced adult cochlear implant users.
    Kelly AS; Purdy SC; Thorne PR
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2005 Jun; 116(6):1235-46. PubMed ID: 15978485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Effects of presentation level on phoneme and sentence recognition in quiet by cochlear implant listeners.
    Donaldson GS; Allen SL
    Ear Hear; 2003 Oct; 24(5):392-405. PubMed ID: 14534410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 1-year postactivation results for sequentially implanted bilateral cochlear implant users.
    Wolfe J; Baker S; Caraway T; Kasulis H; Mears A; Smith J; Swim L; Wood M
    Otol Neurotol; 2007 Aug; 28(5):589-96. PubMed ID: 17667768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.