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.
105 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 1449232)
1. Optimization of single electrode tactile codes. Szeto AY; Farrenkopf GR Ann Biomed Eng; 1992; 20(6):647-65. PubMed ID: 1449232 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Electrocutaneous code pairs for artificial sensory communication systems. Szeto AY Ann Biomed Eng; 1982; 10(4):175-92. PubMed ID: 7171152 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The effect of frequency change on discrimination of pulse bursts in an electrocutaneous tactual vocoder. Bull D; Eilers RE; Oller DK; Mandalia BD J Acoust Soc Am; 1985 Mar; 77(3):1192-8. PubMed ID: 3156905 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Electric pulse frequency and magnitude of perceived sensation during electrocutaneous forearm stimulation. Jelinek HF; McIntyre R Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2010 Sep; 91(9):1378-82. PubMed ID: 20801255 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Optimal EMG signal bandwidth and interelectrode distance for the recording of acoustic, electrocutaneous, and photic blink reflexes. van Boxtel A; Boelhouwer AJ; Bos AR Psychophysiology; 1998 Nov; 35(6):690-7. PubMed ID: 9844430 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The impact of the stimulation frequency on closed-loop control with electrotactile feedback. Paredes LP; Dosen S; Rattay F; Graimann B; Farina D J Neuroeng Rehabil; 2015 Apr; 12():35. PubMed ID: 25889752 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. 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]
8. Relationship between pulse rate and pulse width for a constant-intensity level of electrocutaneous stimulation. Szeto AY Ann Biomed Eng; 1985; 13(5):373-83. PubMed ID: 4073624 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Tactual perception of speech-like stimuli with an electrocutaneous vocoder. Eilers RE; Bull DH; Oller DK Artif Organs; 1984 Nov; 8(4):494-7. PubMed ID: 6239611 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Contours of equal perceived amplitude and equal perceived frequency for electrocutaneous stimuli. Van Doren CL Percept Psychophys; 1997 May; 59(4):613-22. PubMed ID: 9158335 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Psychophysical studies relevant to the design of a digital electrotactile speech processor. Blamey PJ; Clark GM J Acoust Soc Am; 1987 Jul; 82(1):116-25. PubMed ID: 2957405 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Perception thresholds and qualitative perceptions for electrocutaneous stimulation. Dölker EM; Lau S; Bernhard MA; Haueisen J Sci Rep; 2022 May; 12(1):7335. PubMed ID: 35513410 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Effects of training on human tracking of electrocutaneous signals. Szeto AY; Chung YM Ann Biomed Eng; 1986; 14(4):369-81. PubMed ID: 3752640 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Electric-acoustic pitch comparisons in single-sided-deaf cochlear implant users: frequency-place functions and rate pitch. Schatzer R; Vermeire K; Visser D; Krenmayr A; Kals M; Voormolen M; Van de Heyning P; Zierhofer C Hear Res; 2014 Mar; 309():26-35. PubMed ID: 24252455 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Perceived locus and intensity of electrocutaneous stimulation. Higashiyama A; Rollman GB IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 1991 Jul; 38(7):679-86. PubMed ID: 1879861 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Pitch matching psychometrics in electric acoustic stimulation. Baumann U; Rader T; Helbig S; Bahmer A Ear Hear; 2011; 32(5):656-62. PubMed ID: 21869623 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Evaluation and comparison of 50 Hz current threshold of electrocutaneous sensations using different methods. Lindenblatt G; Silny J J Zhejiang Univ Sci B; 2006 Dec; 7(12):933-46. PubMed ID: 17111461 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]