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

120 related items for PubMed ID: 8892567

  • 1. Patient performance with the Cochlear Corporation "20 + 2" implant: bipolar versus monopolar activation.
    Zwolan TA, Kileny PR, Ashbaugh C, Telian SA.
    Am J Otol; 1996 Sep; 17(5):717-23. PubMed ID: 8892567
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. The intensity-pitch relation revisited: monopolar versus bipolar cochlear stimulation.
    Arnoldner C, Riss D, Kaider A, Mair A, Wagenblast J, Baumgartner WD, Gstöttner W, Hamzavi JS.
    Laryngoscope; 2008 Sep; 118(9):1630-6. PubMed ID: 18545213
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Clinical evaluation of higher stimulation rates in the nucleus research platform 8 system.
    Plant K, Holden L, Skinner M, Arcaroli J, Whitford L, Law MA, Nel E.
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):381-93. PubMed ID: 17485987
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Performance with the 20 + 2L lateral wall cochlear implant.
    Kileny PR, Zwolan TA, Telian SA, Boerst A.
    Am J Otol; 1998 May; 19(3):313-9. PubMed ID: 9596181
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Factors associated with development of speech perception skills in children implanted by age five.
    Geers A, Brenner C, Davidson L.
    Ear Hear; 2003 Feb; 24(1 Suppl):24S-35S. PubMed ID: 12612478
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. An investigation of input level range for the nucleus 24 cochlear implant system: speech perception performance, program preference, and loudness comfort ratings.
    James CJ, Skinner MW, Martin LF, Holden LK, Galvin KL, Holden TA, Whitford L.
    Ear Hear; 2003 Apr; 24(2):157-74. PubMed ID: 12677112
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. [Rate discrimination and tone recognition in mandarin-speaking cochlear-implant listeners].
    Wei C, Cao K, Wang Z.
    Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi; 1999 Apr; 34(2):84-8. PubMed ID: 12764854
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Perceptual benefit and functional outcomes for children using sequential bilateral cochlear implants.
    Galvin KL, Mok M, Dowell RC.
    Ear Hear; 2007 Aug; 28(4):470-82. PubMed ID: 17609610
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. The effect of frequency allocation on phoneme recognition with the nucleus 22 cochlear implant.
    Friesen LM, Shannon RV, Slattery WH.
    Am J Otol; 1999 Nov; 20(6):729-34. PubMed ID: 10565716
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Effects of programming threshold and maplaw settings on acoustic thresholds and speech discrimination with the MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implant.
    Boyd PJ.
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):608-18. PubMed ID: 17086073
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. [The Nucleus Double Array Cochlear Implant: a new concept in obliterated cochlea].
    Lenarz T, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Weber BP, Frohne C, Büchner A, Battmer RD, Parker J, von Wallenberg E.
    Laryngorhinootologie; 1999 Aug; 78(8):421-8. PubMed ID: 10488461
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Speech recognition for unilateral and bilateral cochlear implant modes in the presence of uncorrelated noise sources.
    Ricketts TA, Grantham DW, Ashmead DH, Haynes DS, Labadie RF.
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):763-73. PubMed ID: 17086085
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Subjective and objective results after bilateral cochlear implantation in adults.
    Laske RD, Veraguth D, Dillier N, Binkert A, Holzmann D, Huber AM.
    Otol Neurotol; 2009 Apr; 30(3):313-8. PubMed ID: 19318885
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. 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]

  • 16. [Considerations on the rehabilitation of the hearing in cochlear implant patients].
    Amadori M, Pantano N, Cestaro A, Babighian G.
    Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital; 1996 Aug; 16(4):324-33. PubMed ID: 9082826
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. 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]

  • 18. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Audiologic outcomes with the penetrating electrode auditory brainstem implant.
    Otto SR, Shannon RV, Wilkinson EP, Hitselberger WE, McCreery DB, Moore JK, Brackmann DE.
    Otol Neurotol; 2008 Dec; 29(8):1147-54. PubMed ID: 18931643
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. Prognostic value of round-window psychophysical testing with cochlear-implant candidates.
    Shipp DB, Nedzelski JM.
    J Otolaryngol; 1994 Jun; 23(3):172-6. PubMed ID: 8064955
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 6.