References
- Blamey P, Arndt P, Bergeron F, Bredberg G, Brimacombe J, Facer G, Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants. Audiol Neurootol 1996;1:293–306.
- Hamzavi J, Baumgartner WD, Pok SM, Franz P, Gstoettner W. Variables affecting speech perception in postlingually deaf adults following cochlear implantation. Acta Otolaryngol 2003;123:493–8.
- Oh SH, Kim CS, Kang EJ, Lee DS, Lee HJ, Chang SO, Speech perception after cochlear implantation over a 4-year time period. Acta Otolaryngol 2003;123:148–53.
- Ruffin CV, Tyler RS, Witt SA, Dunn CC, Gantz BJ, Rubinstein JT. Long-term performance of Clarion 1.0 cochlear implant users. Laryngoscope 2007;117:1183–90.
- Adunka OF, Buss E, Clark MS, Pillsbury HC, Buchman CA. Effect of preoperative residual hearing on speech perception after cochlear implantation. Laryngoscope 2008;118:2044–9.
- Turner CW, Gantz BJ, Vidal C, Behrens A, Henry BA. Speech recognition in noise for cochlear implant listeners: benefits of residual acoustic hearing. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;115:1729–35.
- Albu S, Babighian G. Predictive factors in cochlear implants. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Belg 1997;51:11–16.
- Spahr AJ, Dorman MF, Loiselle LH. Performance of patients using different cochlear implant systems: effects of input dynamic range. Ear Hear 2007;28:260–75.
- Zeng FG. Trends in cochlear implants. Trends Amplif 2004;8:1–34.
- Arnoldner C, Riss D, Brunner M, Durisin M, Baumgartner WD, Hamzavi JS. Speech and music perception with the new fine structure speech coding strategy: preliminary results. Acta Otolaryngol 2007;127:1298–303.
- Firszt JB, Holden LK, Reeder RM, Skinner MW. Speech recognition in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of standard HiRes and HiRes 120 sound processing. Otol Neurotol 2009;30:146–52.
- Kiefer J, Hohl S, Sturzebecher E, Pfennigdorff T, Gstoettner W. Comparison of speech recognition with different speech coding strategies (SPEAK, CIS, and ACE) and their relationship to telemetric measures of compound action potentials in the nucleus CI 24M cochlear implant system. Audiology 2001;40:32–42.
- Chouard CH, Ouayoun M, Meyer B, Fugain C. Speech coding strategies of the digisonic fully digitized cochlear implant. Acta Otolaryngol 1995;115:264–8.
- Di Lella F, Bacciu A, Pasanisi E, Vincenti V, Guida M, Bacciu S. Main peak interleaved sampling (MPIS) strategy: effect of stimulation rate variations on speech perception in adult cochlear implant recipients using the Digisonic SP cochlear implant. Acta Otolaryngol 2009 May 8, 1–6 [Epub ahead of print].
- Ouayoun M, Pean V, Genin J, Bachelot G, Fugain C, Meyer B, Asynchronous interleaved stimulation (AIS): a new speech coding strategy for cochlear implant. Acta Otolaryngol 1997;117:182–6.
- Friesen LM, Shannon RV, Baskent D, Wang X. Speech recognition in noise as a function of the number of spectral channels: comparison of acoustic hearing and cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 2001;110:1150–63.
- Shannon RV, Zeng FG, Kamath V, Wygonski J, Ekelid M. Speech recognition with primarily temporal cues. Science 1995;270:303–4.
- Throckmorton CS, Collins LM. Investigation of the effects of temporal and spatial interactions on speech-recognition skills in cochlear-implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 1999;105:861–73.
- Zwolan TA, Collins LM, Wakefield GH. Electrode discrimination and speech recognition in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 1997;102:3673–85.
- Anderson I, Weichbold V, D'Haese P. Recent results with the MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implant and TEMPO+ behind-the-ear processor. Ear Nose Throat J 2002;81:229–33.
- Rouger J, Lagleyre S, Fraysse B, Deneve S, Deguine O, Barone P. Evidence that cochlear-implanted deaf patients are better multisensory integrators. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2007;104:7295–300.