101 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 11545227)
21. New parallel stimulation strategies revisited: effect of synchronous multi electrode stimulation on rate discrimination in cochlear implant users.
Bahmer A; Baumann U
Cochlear Implants Int; 2013 Jun; 14(3):142-9. PubMed ID: 22733121
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Modeling the electrode-neuron interface of cochlear implants: effects of neural survival, electrode placement, and the partial tripolar configuration.
Goldwyn JH; Bierer SM; Bierer JA
Hear Res; 2010 Sep; 268(1-2):93-104. PubMed ID: 20580801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Simulating the dual-peak excitation pattern produced by bipolar stimulation of a cochlear implant: effects on speech intelligibility.
Mesnildrey Q; Macherey O
Hear Res; 2015 Jan; 319():32-47. PubMed ID: 25449010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Experimental assessment of polyphonic tones with cochlear implants.
Penninger RT; Limb CJ; Vermeire K; Leman M; Dhooge I
Otol Neurotol; 2013 Sep; 34(7):1267-71. PubMed ID: 23921943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Threshold and channel interaction in cochlear implant users: evaluation of the tripolar electrode configuration.
Bierer JA
J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Mar; 121(3):1642-53. PubMed ID: 17407901
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Effects of electrode configuration on threshold functions for electrical stimulation of the cochlea.
Pfingst BE; Morris DJ; Miller AL
Hear Res; 1995 May; 85(1-2):76-84. PubMed ID: 7559181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Measurements of monopolar and bipolar current spreads using forward-masking with a fixed probe.
Bingabr MG; Espinoza-Varas B; Sigdel S
Cochlear Implants Int; 2014 May; 15(3):166-72. PubMed ID: 24606491
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Effects of stimulation mode, level and location on forward-masked excitation patterns in cochlear implant patients.
Chatterjee M; Galvin JJ; Fu QJ; Shannon RV
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2006 Mar; 7(1):15-25. PubMed ID: 16270234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Pitch and loudness matching of unmodulated and modulated stimuli in cochlear implantees.
Vandali A; Sly D; Cowan R; van Hoesel R
Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 302():32-49. PubMed ID: 23685148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Comparison of Multipole Stimulus Configurations With Respect to Loudness and Spread of Excitation.
Vellinga D; Briaire JJ; van Meenen DMP; Frijns JHM
Ear Hear; 2017; 38(4):487-496. PubMed ID: 28301391
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. 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]
32. Current-level discrimination in the context of interleaved, multichannel stimulation in cochlear implants: effects of number of stimulated electrodes, pulse rate, and electrode separation.
Drennan WR; Pfingst BE
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2006 Sep; 7(3):308-16. PubMed ID: 16794913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. 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]
34. Effect of Pulse Rate on Loudness Discrimination in Cochlear Implant Users.
Azadpour M; McKay CM; Svirsky MA
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2018 Jun; 19(3):287-299. PubMed ID: 29532190
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Effect of current level on electrode discrimination in electrical stimulation.
McKay CM; O'Brien A; James CJ
Hear Res; 1999 Oct; 136(1-2):159-64. PubMed ID: 10511635
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Effects of electrode design and configuration on channel interactions.
Stickney GS; Loizou PC; Mishra LN; Assmann PF; Shannon RV; Opie JM
Hear Res; 2006 Jan; 211(1-2):33-45. PubMed ID: 16338109
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Use of "phantom electrode" technique to extend the range of pitches available through a cochlear implant.
Saoji AA; Litvak LM
Ear Hear; 2010 Oct; 31(5):693-701. PubMed ID: 20467321
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Interpulse interval discrimination within and across channels: comparison of monopolar and tripolar mode of stimulation.
Fielden CA; Kluk K; McKay CM
J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 May; 135(5):2913-22. PubMed ID: 24815271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Fitting prelingually deafened adult cochlear implant users based on electrode discrimination performance.
Debruyne JA; Francart T; Janssen AM; Douma K; Brokx JP
Int J Audiol; 2017 Mar; 56(3):174-185. PubMed ID: 27758152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Thin-film micro-electrode stimulation of the cochlea in rats exposed to aminoglycoside induced hearing loss.
Allitt BJ; Harris AR; Morgan SJ; Clark GM; Paolini AG
Hear Res; 2016 Jan; 331():13-26. PubMed ID: 26471198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
