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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

92 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10530017)

  • 1. Gap detection in single- and multiple-channel stimuli by LAURA cochlear implantees.
    van Wieringen A; Wouters J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Oct; 106(4 Pt 1):1925-39. PubMed ID: 10530017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of inter-phase gap on the sensitivity of cochlear implant users to electrical stimulation.
    Carlyon RP; van Wieringen A; Deeks JM; Long CJ; Lyzenga J; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2005 Jul; 205(1-2):210-24. PubMed ID: 15953530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Temporal gap detection measured with multiple sinusoidal markers: effects of marker number, frequency, and temporal position.
    Formby C; Sherlock LP; Li S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 Aug; 104(2 Pt 1):984-98. PubMed ID: 9714918
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Within-channel gap detection using dissimilar markers in cochlear implant listeners.
    Chatterjee M; Fu QJ; Shannon RV
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 May; 103(5 Pt 1):2515-9. PubMed ID: 9604345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Electrophysiological and psychophysical asymmetries in sensitivity to interaural correlation gaps and implications for binaural integration time.
    Lüddemann H; Kollmeier B; Riedel H
    Hear Res; 2016 Feb; 332():170-187. PubMed ID: 26526276
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Electrical cochlear stimulation in the deaf cat: comparisons between psychophysical and central auditory neuronal thresholds.
    Beitel RE; Snyder RL; Schreiner CE; Raggio MW; Leake PA
    J Neurophysiol; 2000 Apr; 83(4):2145-62. PubMed ID: 10758124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Modulation frequency discrimination with single and multiple channels in cochlear implant users.
    Galvin JJ; Oba S; Başkent D; Fu QJ
    Hear Res; 2015 Jun; 324():7-18. PubMed ID: 25746914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Age-related changes in neural gap detection thresholds in the rat auditory cortex.
    Zhao Y; Xu X; He J; Xu J; Zhang J
    Eur J Neurosci; 2015 Feb; 41(3):285-92. PubMed ID: 25388865
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Gap detection by early-deafened cochlear-implant subjects.
    Busby PA; Clark GM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Mar; 105(3):1841-52. PubMed ID: 10089607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Relation between neural response telemetry thresholds, T- and C-levels, and loudness judgments in 12 adult nucleus 24 cochlear implant recipients.
    Potts LG; Skinner MW; Gotter BD; Strube MJ; Brenner CA
    Ear Hear; 2007 Aug; 28(4):495-511. PubMed ID: 17609612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Detection of small across-channel timing differences by cochlear implantees.
    Carlyon RP; Geurts L; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2000 Mar; 141(1-2):140-54. PubMed ID: 10713502
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Electrophysiological channel interactions using focused multipolar stimulation for cochlear implants.
    George SS; Shivdasani MN; Wise AK; Shepherd RK; Fallon JB
    J Neural Eng; 2015 Dec; 12(6):066005. PubMed ID: 26401834
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The perceptual effects of current pulse duration in electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve.
    McKay CM; McDermott HJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Aug; 106(2):998-1009. PubMed ID: 10462805
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. What do cochlear implants teach us about the encoding of frequency in the auditory system?
    Hanekom JJ
    S Afr J Commun Disord; 2000; 47():49-56. PubMed ID: 11455823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Tone decay at threshold with auditory electrical stimulation in digisonic cochlear implantees.
    Wable J; Frachet B; Gallégo S
    Audiology; 2001; 40(5):265-71. PubMed ID: 11688545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Correlations among within-channel and between-channel auditory gap-detection thresholds in normal listeners.
    Phillips DP; Smith JC
    Perception; 2004; 33(3):371-8. PubMed ID: 15176620
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Horizontal-plane localization of noise and speech signals by postlingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants.
    Grantham DW; Ashmead DH; Ricketts TA; Labadie RF; Haynes DS
    Ear Hear; 2007 Aug; 28(4):524-41. PubMed ID: 17609614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Auditory steady-state responses in cochlear implant users: Effect of modulation frequency and stimulation artifacts.
    Gransier R; Deprez H; Hofmann M; Moonen M; van Wieringen A; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2016 May; 335():149-160. PubMed ID: 26994660
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Neuronal responses in cat primary auditory cortex to electrical cochlear stimulation. I. Intensity dependence of firing rate and response latency.
    Raggio MW; Schreiner CE
    J Neurophysiol; 1994 Nov; 72(5):2334-59. PubMed ID: 7884463
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Visual Temporal Acuity Is Related to Auditory Speech Perception Abilities in Cochlear Implant Users.
    Jahn KN; Stevenson RA; Wallace MT
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(2):236-243. PubMed ID: 27764001
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.