243 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16583899)
21. 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]
22. 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]
23. Responsiveness of the Electrically Stimulated Cochlear Nerve in Children With Cochlear Nerve Deficiency.
He S; Shahsavarani BS; McFayden TC; Wang H; Gill KE; Xu L; Chao X; Luo J; Wang R; He N
Ear Hear; 2018; 39(2):238-250. PubMed ID: 28678078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. The effect of perimodiolar placement on speech perception and frequency discrimination by cochlear implant users.
Fitzgerald MB; Shapiro WH; McDonald PD; Neuburger HS; Ashburn-Reed S; Immerman S; Jethanamest D; Roland JT; Svirsky MA
Acta Otolaryngol; 2007 Apr; 127(4):378-83. PubMed ID: 17453457
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Effects of stimulation level and electrode pairing on the binaural interaction component of the electrically evoked auditory brain stem response.
He S; Brown CJ; Abbas PJ
Ear Hear; 2010 Aug; 31(4):457-70. PubMed ID: 20418771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Modeling the relationship between psychophysical perception and electrically evoked compound action potential threshold in young cochlear implant recipients: clinical implications for implant fitting.
Thai-Van H; Truy E; Charasse B; Boutitie F; Chanal JM; Cochard N; Piron JP; Ribas S; Deguine O; Fraysse B; Mondain M; Uziel A; Collet L
Clin Neurophysiol; 2004 Dec; 115(12):2811-24. PubMed ID: 15546789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Electrode ranking of "place pitch" and speech recognition in electrical hearing.
Nelson DA; Van Tasell DJ; Schroder AC; Soli S; Levine S
J Acoust Soc Am; 1995 Oct; 98(4):1987-99. PubMed ID: 7593921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. A psychophysical forward masking comparison of longitudinal spread of neural excitation in the Contour and straight Nucleus electrode arrays.
Cohen LT; Lenarz T; Battmer RD; Bender von Saebelkampf C; Busby PA; Cowan RS
Int J Audiol; 2005 Oct; 44(10):559-66. PubMed ID: 16315446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. A new approach for the determination of ECAP thresholds.
Hoth S; Spitzer P; Praetorius M
Cochlear Implants Int; 2018 Mar; 19(2):104-114. PubMed ID: 29161976
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Auditory prostheses research with multiple channel intracochlear stimulation in man.
Eddington DK; Dobelle WH; Brackmann DE; Mladejovsky MG; Parkin JL
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 1978; 87(6 Pt 2):1-39. PubMed ID: 736424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Excitation Patterns of Standard and Steered Partial Tripolar Stimuli in Cochlear Implants.
Wu CC; Luo X
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2016 Apr; 17(2):145-58. PubMed ID: 26691160
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Intraoperative findings on ECAP-measurement: normal or special case?
Müller A; Hocke T; Mir-Salim P
Int J Audiol; 2015 Apr; 54(4):257-64. PubMed ID: 25421058
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Importance of Perimodiolar Electrode Position for Psychoacoustic Discrimination in Cochlear Implantation.
Ramos Macias A; Perez Zaballos MT; Ramos de Miguel A; Cervera Paz J
Otol Neurotol; 2017 Dec; 38(10):e429-e437. PubMed ID: 29135866
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Association Between Intracochlear Electrode Design and Electrically-Evoked Compound Action Potential Measures in Cochlear Implant Users.
Kim JS; Hong SH; Moon IJ
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2024 May; ():. PubMed ID: 38774957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. 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]
36. The Effect of Electrode Position on Behavioral and Electrophysiologic Measurements in Perimodiolar Cochlear Implants.
Collins A; Foghsgaard S; Druce E; Margani V; Mejia O; O'Leary S
Otol Neurotol; 2024 Mar; 45(3):238-244. PubMed ID: 38238914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. 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]
38. 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]
39. Modiolar coiling, electrical thresholds, and speech perception after cochlear implantation using the nucleus contour advance electrode with the advance off stylet technique.
Huang TC; Reitzen SD; Marrinan MS; Waltzman SB; Roland JT
Otol Neurotol; 2006 Feb; 27(2):159-66. PubMed ID: 16436984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Dual electrode stimulation using the nucleus CI24RE cochlear implant: electrode impedance and pitch ranking studies.
Busby PA; Plant KL
Ear Hear; 2005 Oct; 26(5):504-11. PubMed ID: 16230899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
