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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

148 related items for PubMed ID: 19275329

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Spectral and temporal cues in cochlear implant speech perception.
    Nie K, Barco A, Zeng FG.
    Ear Hear; 2006 Apr; 27(2):208-17. PubMed ID: 16518146
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Performance of subjects fit with the Advanced Bionics CII and Nucleus 3G cochlear implant devices.
    Spahr AJ, Dorman MF.
    Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2004 May; 130(5):624-8. PubMed ID: 15148187
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Consonant perception by users of Nucleus and Clarion multichannel cochlear implants.
    Doyle KJ, Mills D, Larky J, Kessler D, Luxford WM, Schindler RA.
    Am J Otol; 1995 Sep; 16(5):676-81. PubMed ID: 8588676
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Use of S-shaped input-output functions for noise suppression in cochlear implants.
    Kasturi K, Loizou PC.
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):402-11. PubMed ID: 17485989
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. The benefits of remote microphone technology for adults with cochlear implants.
    Fitzpatrick EM, Séguin C, Schramm DR, Armstrong S, Chénier J.
    Ear Hear; 2009 Oct; 30(5):590-9. PubMed ID: 19561509
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Speech recognition with varying numbers and types of competing talkers by normal-hearing, cochlear-implant, and implant simulation subjects.
    Cullington HE, Zeng FG.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Jan; 123(1):450-61. PubMed ID: 18177173
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Speech discrimination via cochlear implants with two different digital speech processing strategies: preliminary results for 7 patients.
    Dillier N, Bögli H, Spillmann T.
    Scand Audiol Suppl; 1993 Jan; 38():145-53. PubMed ID: 8153560
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Encoding frequency modulation to improve cochlear implant performance in noise.
    Nie K, Stickney G, Zeng FG.
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2005 Jan; 52(1):64-73. PubMed ID: 15651565
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Results from a psychoacoustic model-based strategy for the nucleus-24 and freedom cochlear implants.
    Büchner A, Nogueira W, Edler B, Battmer RD, Lenarz T.
    Otol Neurotol; 2008 Feb; 29(2):189-92. PubMed ID: 18223445
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 8.