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.
94 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12842730)
1. Assessing auditory nerve recovery function with a modified subtraction method: results and mathematical modeling. Charasse B; Thai-Van H; Berger-Vachon C; Collet L Clin Neurophysiol; 2003 Jul; 114(7):1307-15. PubMed ID: 12842730 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. An improved method of reducing stimulus artifact in the electrically evoked whole-nerve potential. Miller CA; Abbas PJ; Brown CJ Ear Hear; 2000 Aug; 21(4):280-90. PubMed ID: 10981604 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Measuring temporal response properties of auditory nerve fibers in cochlear implant recipients. Tabibi S; Kegel A; Lai WK; Bruce IC; Dillier N Hear Res; 2019 Sep; 380():187-196. PubMed ID: 31325737 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Recovery characteristics of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve in deafened guinea pigs: relation to neuronal status. Ramekers D; Versnel H; Strahl SB; Klis SF; Grolman W Hear Res; 2015 Mar; 321():12-24. PubMed ID: 25582354 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) in cochlear implant children: Changes in auditory nerve response in first year of cochlear implant use. Telmesani LM; Said NM Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2016 Mar; 82():28-33. PubMed ID: 26857311 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Neural response telemetry reconsidered: II. The influence of neural population on the ECAP recovery function and refractoriness. Botros A; Psarros C Ear Hear; 2010 Jun; 31(3):380-91. PubMed ID: 20090532 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Electrically evoked compound action potential (ECAP) of the cochlear nerve in response to pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea in the rat: effects of stimulation at high rates. Haenggeli A; Zhang JS; Vischer MW; Pelizzone M; Rouiller EM Audiology; 1998; 37(6):353-71. PubMed ID: 9888192 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The impact of auditory nerve functional states on the correlations between human and computer decisions for electrically evoked compound action potential threshold. Li Q; Zhang C; Lu T; Xu C; Sun Z; Fan W; Wang Z; Li S Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2020 Apr; 131():109866. PubMed ID: 31945736 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Facilitation and refractoriness of the electrically evoked compound action potential. Hey M; Müller-Deile J; Hessel H; Killian M Hear Res; 2017 Nov; 355():14-22. PubMed ID: 28947082 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 5. refractory recovery and facilitation. Cohen LT Hear Res; 2009 Feb; 248(1-2):1-14. PubMed ID: 19110048 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Psychophysical versus physiological spatial forward masking and the relation to speech perception in cochlear implants. Hughes ML; Stille LJ Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):435-52. PubMed ID: 18344869 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Electrically evoked compound action potentials are different depending on the site of cochlear stimulation. van de Heyning P; Arauz SL; Atlas M; Baumgartner WD; Caversaccio M; Chester-Browne R; Estienne P; Gavilan J; Godey B; Gstöttner W; Han D; Hagen R; Kompis M; Kuzovkov V; Lassaletta L; Lefevre F; Li Y; Müller J; Parnes L; Kleine Punte A; Raine C; Rajan G; Rivas A; Rivas JA; Royle N; Sprinzl G; Stephan K; Walkowiak A; Yanov Y; Zimmermann K; Zorowka P; Skarzynski H Cochlear Implants Int; 2016 Nov; 17(6):251-262. PubMed ID: 27900916 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effect of stimulus and recording parameters on spatial spread of excitation and masking patterns obtained with the electrically evoked compound action potential in cochlear implants. Hughes ML; Stille LJ Ear Hear; 2010 Oct; 31(5):679-92. PubMed ID: 20505513 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Spatial spread of neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of improved ECAP method and psychophysical forward masking. Cohen LT; Richardson LM; Saunders E; Cowan RS Hear Res; 2003 May; 179(1-2):72-87. PubMed ID: 12742240 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Electrically evoked amplitude modulation following response in cochlear implant candidates: comparison with auditory nerve response telemetry, subjective electrical stimulation, and speech perception. Hirschfelder A; Gräbel S; Olze H Otol Neurotol; 2012 Aug; 33(6):968-75. PubMed ID: 22772009 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 1. Growth of loudness and ECAP amplitude with current. Cohen LT Hear Res; 2009 Jan; 247(2):87-99. PubMed ID: 19063956 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Measuring the refractoriness of the electrically stimulated auditory nerve. Morsnowski A; Charasse B; Collet L; Killian M; Müller-Deile J Audiol Neurootol; 2006; 11(6):389-402. PubMed ID: 17008774 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Application of triphasic pulses with adjustable phase amplitude ratio (PAR) for cochlear ECAP recording: I. amplitude growth functions. Bahmer A; Baumann U J Neurosci Methods; 2012 Mar; 205(1):202-11. PubMed ID: 22209768 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Using evoked compound action potentials to assess activation of electrodes and predict C-levels in the Tempo+ cochlear implant speech processor. Alvarez I; de la Torre A; Sainz M; Roldán C; Schoesser H; Spitzer P Ear Hear; 2010 Feb; 31(1):134-45. PubMed ID: 19838116 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 3. ECAP during bursts and loudness as function of burst duration. Cohen LT Hear Res; 2009 Jan; 247(2):112-21. PubMed ID: 19068227 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]