146 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18247907)
1. Across-site patterns of modulation detection in listeners with cochlear implants.
Pfingst BE; Burkholder-Juhasz RA; Xu L; Thompson CS
J Acoust Soc Am; 2008 Feb; 123(2):1054-62. PubMed ID: 18247907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effects of site-specific level adjustments on speech recognition with cochlear implants.
Zhou N; Pfingst BE
Ear Hear; 2014; 35(1):30-40. PubMed ID: 24225651
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Across-site patterns of modulation detection: relation to speech recognition.
Garadat SN; Zwolan TA; Pfingst BE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 May; 131(5):4030-41. PubMed ID: 22559376
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Relationship Between Peripheral and Psychophysical Measures of Amplitude Modulation Detection in Cochlear Implant Users.
Tejani VD; Abbas PJ; Brown CJ
Ear Hear; 2017; 38(5):e268-e284. PubMed ID: 28207576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Effects of electrode configuration on cochlear implant modulation detection thresholds.
Pfingst BE
J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jun; 129(6):3908-15. PubMed ID: 21682413
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A method to dynamically control unwanted loudness cues when measuring amplitude modulation detection in cochlear implant users.
Galvin JJ; Fu QJ; Oba S; Başkent D
J Neurosci Methods; 2014 Jan; 222():207-12. PubMed ID: 24269251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessing temporal modulation sensitivity using electrically evoked auditory steady state responses.
Luke R; Van Deun L; Hofmann M; van Wieringen A; Wouters J
Hear Res; 2015 Jun; 324():37-45. PubMed ID: 25746913
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Single- and multi-channel modulation detection in cochlear implant users.
Galvin JJ; Oba S; Fu QJ; Başkent D
PLoS One; 2014; 9(6):e99338. PubMed ID: 24918605
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Binaural cue sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients with acoustic hearing preservation.
Gifford RH; Stecker GC
Hear Res; 2020 May; 390():107929. PubMed ID: 32182551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Using temporal modulation sensitivity to select stimulation sites for processor MAPs in cochlear implant listeners.
Garadat SN; Zwolan TA; Pfingst BE
Audiol Neurootol; 2013; 18(4):247-60. PubMed ID: 23881208
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants.
Pfingst BE; Xu L
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2004 Mar; 5(1):11-24. PubMed ID: 14605920
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Psychophysical measures from electrical stimulation of the human cochlear nucleus.
Shannon RV; Otto SR
Hear Res; 1990 Aug; 47(1-2):159-68. PubMed ID: 2228792
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Relationship between gap detection thresholds and loudness in cochlear-implant users.
Garadat SN; Pfingst BE
Hear Res; 2011 May; 275(1-2):130-8. PubMed ID: 21168479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effects of carrier pulse rate and stimulation site on modulation detection by subjects with cochlear implants.
Pfingst BE; Xu L; Thompson CS
J Acoust Soc Am; 2007 Apr; 121(4):2236-46. PubMed ID: 17471737
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Auditory Performance and Electrical Stimulation Measures in Cochlear Implant Recipients With Auditory Neuropathy Compared With Severe to Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss.
Attias J; Greenstein T; Peled M; Ulanovski D; Wohlgelernter J; Raveh E
Ear Hear; 2017; 38(2):184-193. PubMed ID: 28225734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Toward a battery of behavioral and objective measures to achieve optimal cochlear implant stimulation levels in children.
Gordon KA; Papsin BC; Harrison RV
Ear Hear; 2004 Oct; 25(5):447-63. PubMed ID: 15599192
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Influence of stimulation rate and loudness growth on modulation detection and intensity discrimination in cochlear implant users.
Galvin JJ; Fu QJ
Hear Res; 2009 Apr; 250(1-2):46-54. PubMed ID: 19450432
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Simulating electrical modulation detection thresholds using a biophysical model of the auditory nerve.
O'Brien GE; Imennov NS; Rubinstein JT
J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 May; 139(5):2448. PubMed ID: 27250141
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Temporal Modulation Detection Depends on Sharpness of Spatial Tuning.
Zhou N; Cadmus M; Dong L; Mathews J
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2018 Jun; 19(3):317-330. PubMed ID: 29696448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
