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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

107 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16230894)

  • 1. Are cochlear implant patients suffering from perceptual dissonance?
    Loeb GE
    Ear Hear; 2005 Oct; 26(5):435-50. PubMed ID: 16230894
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Application of a pitch perception model to investigate the effect of stimulation field spread on the pitch ranking abilities of cochlear implant recipients.
    Erfanian Saeedi N; Blamey PJ; Burkitt AN; Grayden DB
    Hear Res; 2014 Oct; 316():129-37. PubMed ID: 25193552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Music perception with temporal cues in acoustic and electric hearing.
    Kong YY; Cruz R; Jones JA; Zeng FG
    Ear Hear; 2004 Apr; 25(2):173-85. PubMed ID: 15064662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Changes in pitch with a cochlear implant over time.
    Reiss LA; Turner CW; Erenberg SR; Gantz BJ
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2007 Jun; 8(2):241-57. PubMed ID: 17347777
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Phase-locked responses of cochlear nucleus units to electrical stimulation through a cochlear implant.
    Glass I
    Exp Brain Res; 1984; 55(2):386-90. PubMed ID: 6547677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Objective measurements of auditory nerve recovery function in nucleus CI 24 implantees in relation to subjective preference of stimulation rate.
    Shpak T; Berlin M; Luntz M
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2004 Aug; 124(6):679-83. PubMed ID: 15515490
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the coding of frequency, the perception of pitch and the development of cochlear implant speech processing strategies for profoundly deaf people.
    Clark GM
    Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol; 1996 Sep; 23(9):766-76. PubMed ID: 8911712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Stimulating on multiple electrodes can improve temporal pitch perception.
    Penninger RT; Kludt E; Büchner A; Nogueira W
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Jun; 54(6):376-83. PubMed ID: 25630393
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Place dependent stimulation rates improve pitch perception in cochlear implantees with single-sided deafness.
    Rader T; Döge J; Adel Y; Weissgerber T; Baumann U
    Hear Res; 2016 Sep; 339():94-103. PubMed ID: 27374479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Acoustic to electric pitch comparisons in cochlear implant subjects with residual hearing.
    Boëx C; Baud L; Cosendai G; Sigrist A; Kós MI; Pelizzone M
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2006 Jun; 7(2):110-24. PubMed ID: 16450213
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Frequency-place map for electrical stimulation in cochlear implants: Change over time.
    Vermeire K; Landsberger DM; Van de Heyning PH; Voormolen M; Kleine Punte A; Schatzer R; Zierhofer C
    Hear Res; 2015 Aug; 326():8-14. PubMed ID: 25840373
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. Improved perception of music with a harmonic based algorithm for cochlear implants.
    Li X; Nie K; Imennov NS; Rubinstein JT; Atlas LE
    IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng; 2013 Jul; 21(4):684-94. PubMed ID: 23613083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Acoustic emissions from the ear: a summary of results from humans and animals.
    Zurek PM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1985 Jul; 78(1 Pt 2):340-4. PubMed ID: 4031240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Masking release with changing fundamental frequency: Electric acoustic stimulation resembles normal hearing subjects.
    Auinger AB; Riss D; Liepins R; Rader T; Keck T; Keintzel T; Kaider A; Baumgartner WD; Gstoettner W; Arnoldner C
    Hear Res; 2017 Jul; 350():226-234. PubMed ID: 28527538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Pitch comparisons of acoustically and electrically evoked auditory sensations.
    Blamey PJ; Dooley GJ; Parisi ES; Clark GM
    Hear Res; 1996 Sep; 99(1-2):139-50. PubMed ID: 8970822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Speech perception with F0mod, a cochlear implant pitch coding strategy.
    Francart T; Osses A; Wouters J
    Int J Audiol; 2015 Jun; 54(6):424-32. PubMed ID: 25697275
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Trends in cochlear implants.
    Zeng FG
    Trends Amplif; 2004; 8(1):1-34. PubMed ID: 15247993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.