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 *

120 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17086078)

  • 1. Acoustic change complexes recorded in adult cochlear implant listeners.
    Friesen LM; Tremblay KL
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):678-85. PubMed ID: 17086078
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Test-retest reliability of cortical evoked potentials using naturally produced speech sounds.
    Tremblay KL; Friesen L; Martin BA; Wright R
    Ear Hear; 2003 Jun; 24(3):225-32. PubMed ID: 12799544
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Electrophysiological and speech perception measures of auditory processing in experienced adult cochlear implant users.
    Kelly AS; Purdy SC; Thorne PR
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2005 Jun; 116(6):1235-46. PubMed ID: 15978485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials Recorded From Nucleus Hybrid Cochlear Implant Users.
    Brown CJ; Jeon EK; Chiou LK; Kirby B; Karsten SA; Turner CW; Abbas PJ
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(6):723-32. PubMed ID: 26295607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cortical neural activity underlying speech perception in postlingual adult cochlear implant recipients.
    Henkin Y; Tetin-Schneider S; Hildesheimer M; Kishon-Rabin L
    Audiol Neurootol; 2009; 14(1):39-53. PubMed ID: 18781063
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of programming threshold and maplaw settings on acoustic thresholds and speech discrimination with the MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implant.
    Boyd PJ
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):608-18. PubMed ID: 17086073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Horizontal-plane localization of noise and speech signals by postlingually deafened adults fitted with bilateral cochlear implants.
    Grantham DW; Ashmead DH; Ricketts TA; Labadie RF; Haynes DS
    Ear Hear; 2007 Aug; 28(4):524-41. PubMed ID: 17609614
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Speech-evoked cognitive P300 potentials in cochlear implant recipients.
    Micco AG; Kraus N; Koch DB; McGee TJ; Carrell TD; Sharma A; Nicol T; Wiet RJ
    Am J Otol; 1995 Jul; 16(4):514-20. PubMed ID: 8588653
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The benefits of remote microphone technology for adults with cochlear implants.
    Fitzpatrick EM; Séguin C; Schramm DR; Armstrong S; Chénier J
    Ear Hear; 2009 Oct; 30(5):590-9. PubMed ID: 19561509
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. A method for removing cochlear implant artifact.
    Friesen LM; Picton TW
    Hear Res; 2010 Jan; 259(1-2):95-106. PubMed ID: 19878712
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Evaluation of evoked potentials to dyadic tones after cochlear implantation.
    Sandmann P; Eichele T; Buechler M; Debener S; Jäncke L; Dillier N; Hugdahl K; Meyer M
    Brain; 2009 Jul; 132(Pt 7):1967-79. PubMed ID: 19293240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Characterizing responses from auditory cortex in young people with several years of cochlear implant experience.
    Gordon KA; Tanaka S; Wong DD; Papsin BC
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2008 Oct; 119(10):2347-62. PubMed ID: 18752993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessing binaural/bimodal advantages using auditory event-related potentials in subjects with cochlear implants.
    Sasaki T; Yamamoto K; Iwaki T; Kubo T
    Auris Nasus Larynx; 2009 Oct; 36(5):541-6. PubMed ID: 19297109
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The influence of temporal stimulus changes on speech-evoked potentials revealed by approximations of tone-evoked waveforms.
    Burger M; Hoppe U; Lohscheller J; Eysholdt U; Döllinger M
    Ear Hear; 2009 Feb; 30(1):16-22. PubMed ID: 19050643
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Conservation of residual acoustic hearing after cochlear implantation.
    Balkany TJ; Connell SS; Hodges AV; Payne SL; Telischi FF; Eshraghi AA; Angeli SI; Germani R; Messiah S; Arheart KL
    Otol Neurotol; 2006 Dec; 27(8):1083-8. PubMed ID: 17130798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Clinical evaluation of higher stimulation rates in the nucleus research platform 8 system.
    Plant K; Holden L; Skinner M; Arcaroli J; Whitford L; Law MA; Nel E
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):381-93. PubMed ID: 17485987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Neural representation of amplified speech sounds.
    Tremblay KL; Billings CJ; Friesen LM; Souza PE
    Ear Hear; 2006 Apr; 27(2):93-103. PubMed ID: 16518138
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Standard cochlear implantation of adults with residual low-frequency hearing: implications for combined electro-acoustic stimulation.
    Novak MA; Black JM; Koch DB
    Otol Neurotol; 2007 Aug; 28(5):609-14. PubMed ID: 17514064
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Production and perception of speech intonation in pediatric cochlear implant recipients and individuals with normal hearing.
    Peng SC; Tomblin JB; Turner CW
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):336-51. PubMed ID: 18344873
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. [Long-latency evoked acoustic potentials in patients with cochlear implants compared with normally hearing subjects].
    Danilkina GV; Wolberet T; Vishniakov VV; Hoppe U
    Vestn Otorinolaringol; 2009; (3):16-8. PubMed ID: 19692958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.