2006
DOI: 10.1080/00016480500469552
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of different mobile telephones in Combi40 + users

Abstract: Mean scores for telephonic speech discrimination were over 85% for CID sentences and 28-59% for bisyllabic words. The Siemens M55 was superior to the other mobile telephones tested.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
8
2
Order By: Relevance
“…For those patients without a mobile telephone available, a Siemens M55 was employed, as this model has demonstrated excellent sound quality in previous studies [14]. A list of the mobile telephones employed is given in Table II.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For those patients without a mobile telephone available, a Siemens M55 was employed, as this model has demonstrated excellent sound quality in previous studies [14]. A list of the mobile telephones employed is given in Table II.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Castro et al (19) measured live-voice speech recognition in quiet and in noise for 18 participants using MED-EL implants with four different telephones: a landline, two different mobile telephone models, and the users' own mobile phone. Live-voice speech recognition was evaluated with the Central Institute for the Deaf (CID) sentences (Spanish version) in quiet and with bisyllabic words in quiet and in noise.…”
Section: Performance On the Telephonementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Alternatively, the signal transmission characteristics over landlines in Western Australia could be particularly poor as compared with those in Spain, where Castro et al completed their study. 10…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%