Display Settings:

Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Results: 1 to 20 of 170

1.

Evaluation of speech recognition of cochlear implant recipients using a personal digital adaptive radio frequency system.

Wolfe J, Morais M, Schafer E, Mills E, Mülder HE, Goldbeck F, Marquis F, John A, Hudson M, Peters BR, Lianos L.

J Am Acad Audiol. 2013 Sep;24(8):714-24. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.24.8.8.

PMID:
24131607
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
2.

Evaluation of speech recognition in noise with cochlear implants and dynamic FM.

Wolfe J, Schafer EC, Heldner B, Mülder H, Ward E, Vincent B.

J Am Acad Audiol. 2009 Jul-Aug;20(7):409-21.

PMID:
19928395
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
3.

Electromagnetic versus electrical coupling of personal frequency modulation (FM) receivers to cochlear implant sound processors.

Schafer EC, Romine D, Musgrave E, Momin S, Huynh C.

J Am Acad Audiol. 2013 Nov-Dec;24(10):927-40. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.24.10.5.

PMID:
24384079
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
4.

Optimization of programming parameters in children with the advanced bionics cochlear implant.

Baudhuin J, Cadieux J, Firszt JB, Reeder RM, Maxson JL.

J Am Acad Audiol. 2012 May;23(5):302-12. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.23.5.2.

PMID:
22533974
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
5.

Optimizing the benefit of sound processors coupled to personal FM systems.

Wolfe J, Schafer EC.

J Am Acad Audiol. 2008 Sep;19(8):585-94.

PMID:
19323350
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
6.

A proposed electroacoustic test protocol for personal FM receivers coupled to cochlear implant sound processors.

Schafer EC, Musgrave E, Momin S, Sandrock C, Romine D.

J Am Acad Audiol. 2013 Nov-Dec;24(10):941-54. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.24.10.6.

PMID:
24384080
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
7.
8.

Effects of input processing and type of personal frequency modulation system on speech-recognition performance of adults with cochlear implants.

Wolfe J, Schafer E, Parkinson A, John A, Hudson M, Wheeler J, Mucci A.

Ear Hear. 2013 Jan-Feb;34(1):52-62. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3182611982.

PMID:
22941405
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
9.

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. doi: 10.1080/14992020802572635.

PMID:
19363720
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
10.

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. doi: 10.1097/MAO.0b013e31825367a5.

PMID:
22588233
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
11.

Recognition of speech presented at soft to loud levels by adult cochlear implant recipients of three cochlear implant systems.

Firszt JB, Holden LK, Skinner MW, Tobey EA, Peterson A, Gaggl W, Runge-Samuelson CL, Wackym PA.

Ear Hear. 2004 Aug;25(4):375-87.

PMID:
15292777
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
12.

The use of frequency compression by cochlear implant recipients with postoperative acoustic hearing.

McDermott H, Henshall K.

J Am Acad Audiol. 2010 Jun;21(6):380-9. doi: 10.3766/jaaa.21.6.3.

PMID:
20701835
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
13.

[Improving speech comprehension using a new cochlear implant speech processor].

Müller-Deile J, Kortmann T, Hoppe U, Hessel H, Morsnowski A.

HNO. 2009 Jun;57(6):567-74. doi: 10.1007/s00106-008-1781-3. German.

PMID:
18685820
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
14.

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. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e3181acfb70.

PMID:
19561509
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
15.

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.

PMID:
14534410
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
16.

Benefits of bilateral electrical stimulation with the nucleus cochlear implant in adults: 6-month postoperative results.

Laszig R, Aschendorff A, Stecker M, Müller-Deile J, Maune S, Dillier N, Weber B, Hey M, Begall K, Lenarz T, Battmer RD, Böhm M, Steffens T, Strutz J, Linder T, Probst R, Allum J, Westhofen M, Doering W.

Otol Neurotol. 2004 Nov;25(6):958-68.

PMID:
15547426
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
17.

Amplitude mapping and phoneme recognition in cochlear implant listeners.

Zeng FG, Galvin JJ 3rd.

Ear Hear. 1999 Feb;20(1):60-74.

PMID:
10037066
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
18.

Optimizing the perception of soft speech and speech in noise with the Advanced Bionics cochlear implant system.

Holden LK, Reeder RM, Firszt JB, Finley CC.

Int J Audiol. 2011 Apr;50(4):255-69. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2010.533200. Epub 2011 Jan 28.

PMID:
21275500
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article
19.

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.

PMID:
15148187
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
20.

Comparison of electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds and loudness estimates for the stimuli used to program the Advanced Bionics cochlear implant.

Jeon EK, Brown CJ, Etler CP, O'Brien S, Chiou LK, Abbas PJ.

J Am Acad Audiol. 2010 Jan;21(1):16-27.

PMID:
20085196
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Display Settings:

Format
Items per page
Sort by

Send to:

Choose Destination

Supplemental Content

Write to the Help Desk