101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11545227)
1. Effects of electrode configuration and stimulus level on rate and level discrimination with cochlear implants.
Morris DJ; Pfingst BE
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2000 Nov; 1(3):211-23. PubMed ID: 11545227
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Effects of electrode configuration and place of stimulation on speech perception with cochlear prostheses.
Pfingst BE; Franck KH; Xu L; Bauer EM; Zwolan TA
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2001 Jun; 2(2):87-103. PubMed ID: 11550528
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effects of stimulus level on speech perception with cochlear prostheses.
Franck KH; Xu L; Pfingst BE
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2003 Mar; 4(1):49-59. PubMed ID: 12118364
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Speech perception with mono- and quadrupolar electrode configurations: a crossover study.
Mens LH; Berenstein CK
Otol Neurotol; 2005 Sep; 26(5):957-64. PubMed ID: 16151343
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Effects of stimulus configuration on psychophysical operating levels and on speech recognition with cochlear implants.
Pfingst BE; Zwolan TA; Holloway LA
Hear Res; 1997 Oct; 112(1-2):247-60. PubMed ID: 9367245
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Current-level discrimination using bipolar and monopolar electrode configurations in cochlear implants.
Drennan WR; Pfingst BE
Hear Res; 2005 Apr; 202(1-2):170-9. PubMed ID: 15811709
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Effects of electrical current configuration on stimulus detection.
Pfingst BE; Miller AL; Morris DJ; Zwolan TA; Spelman FA; Clopton BM
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep; 166():127-31. PubMed ID: 7668603
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Auditory cortical images of cochlear-implant stimuli: dependence on electrode configuration.
Bierer JA; Middlebrooks JC
J Neurophysiol; 2002 Jan; 87(1):478-92. PubMed ID: 11784764
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Cochlear-implant high pulse rate and narrow electrode configuration impair transmission of temporal information to the auditory cortex.
Middlebrooks JC
J Neurophysiol; 2008 Jul; 100(1):92-107. PubMed ID: 18450583
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Effects of stimulus level on electrode-place discrimination in human subjects with cochlear implants.
Pfingst BE; Holloway LA; Zwolan TA; Collins LM
Hear Res; 1999 Aug; 134(1-2):105-15. PubMed ID: 10452380
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Dynamic Current Focusing: A Novel Approach to Loudness Coding in Cochlear Implants.
de Jong MAM; Briaire JJ; Frijns JHM
Ear Hear; 2019; 40(1):34-44. PubMed ID: 29742542
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Efficacy of a cochlear implant simultaneous analog stimulation strategy coupled with a monopolar electrode configuration.
Xu L; Zwolan TA; Thompson CS; Pfingst BE
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 2005 Nov; 114(11):886-93. PubMed ID: 16363059
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Effects of level on nonspectral frequency difference limens for electrical and acoustic stimuli.
Pfingst BE; Rai DT
Hear Res; 1990 Dec; 50(1-2):43-56. PubMed ID: 2076982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Loudness summation for pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea: effects of rate, electrode separation, level, and mode of stimulation.
McKay CM; Remine MD; McDermott HJ
J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Sep; 110(3 Pt 1):1514-24. PubMed ID: 11572362
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Effect of electrode configuration on psychophysical forward masking in cochlear implant listeners.
Kwon BJ; van den Honert C
J Acoust Soc Am; 2006 May; 119(5 Pt 1):2994-3002. PubMed ID: 16708955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Loudness growth in cochlear implants: effect of stimulation rate and electrode configuration.
Fu QJ
Hear Res; 2005 Apr; 202(1-2):55-62. PubMed ID: 15811699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Electrical field imaging as a means to predict the loudness of monopolar and tripolar stimuli in cochlear implant patients.
Berenstein CK; Vanpoucke FJ; Mulder JJ; Mens LH
Hear Res; 2010 Dec; 270(1-2):28-38. PubMed ID: 20946945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Pure-Tone Masking Patterns for Monopolar and Phantom Electrical Stimulation in Cochlear Implants.
Saoji AA; Koka K; Litvak LM; Finley CC
Ear Hear; 2018; 39(1):124-130. PubMed ID: 28700446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
