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.
6. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the effect of electrode position on neural excitation. Shepherd RK; Hatsushika S; Clark GM Hear Res; 1993 Mar; 66(1):108-20. PubMed ID: 8473242 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Forward masking in different cochlear implant systems. Boëx C; Kós MI; Pelizzone M J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Oct; 114(4 Pt 1):2058-65. PubMed ID: 14587605 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Threshold, comfortable level and impedance changes as a function of electrode-modiolar distance. Saunders E; Cohen L; Aschendorff A; Shapiro W; Knight M; Stecker M; Richter B; Waltzman S; Tykocinski M; Roland T; Laszig R; Cowan R Ear Hear; 2002 Feb; 23(1 Suppl):28S-40S. PubMed ID: 11883764 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A psychophysical forward masking comparison of longitudinal spread of neural excitation in the Contour and straight Nucleus electrode arrays. Cohen LT; Lenarz T; Battmer RD; Bender von Saebelkampf C; Busby PA; Cowan RS Int J Audiol; 2005 Oct; 44(10):559-66. PubMed ID: 16315446 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Intracochlear Position of Cochlear Implants Determined Using CT Scanning versus Fitting Levels: Higher Threshold Levels at Basal Turn. van der Beek FB; Briaire JJ; van der Marel KS; Verbist BM; Frijns JH Audiol Neurootol; 2016; 21(1):54-67. PubMed ID: 26891130 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants. Pfingst BE; Xu L J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2004 Mar; 5(1):11-24. PubMed ID: 14605920 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Electrophysiologic channel interaction, electrode pitch ranking, and behavioral threshold in straight versus perimodiolar cochlear implant electrode arrays. Hughes ML; Abbas PJ J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 Mar; 119(3):1538-47. PubMed ID: 16583899 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. Perceptual changes with monopolar and phantom electrode stimulation. Klawitter S; Landsberger DM; Büchner A; Nogueira W Hear Res; 2018 Mar; 359():64-75. PubMed ID: 29325874 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An overview of cochlear implant electrode array designs. Dhanasingh A; Jolly C Hear Res; 2017 Dec; 356():93-103. PubMed ID: 29102129 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cochlear implant place psychophysics. 2. Comparison of forward masking and pitch estimation data. Cohen LT; Busby PA; Clark GM Audiol Neurootol; 1996; 1(5):278-92. PubMed ID: 9390809 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Auditory cortical images of cochlear-implant stimuli: coding of stimulus channel and current level. Middlebrooks JC; Bierer JA J Neurophysiol; 2002 Jan; 87(1):493-507. PubMed ID: 11784765 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Effects of Clarion electrode design on mapping levels in children. Franck KH; Shah UK; Marsh RR; Potsic WP Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 2002 Dec; 111(12 Pt 1):1128-32. PubMed ID: 12498376 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Modifying cochlear implant design: advantages of placing a return electrode in the modiolus. Ho SY; Wiet RJ; Richter CP Otol Neurotol; 2004 Jul; 25(4):497-503. PubMed ID: 15241228 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Assessing the Electrode-Neuron Interface with the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential, Electrode Position, and Behavioral Thresholds. DeVries L; Scheperle R; Bierer JA J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2016 Jun; 17(3):237-52. PubMed ID: 26926152 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]