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 *

300 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19464523)

  • 1. Estimation of stimulus attenuation in cochlear implants.
    Smit JE; Hanekom T; Hanekom JJ
    J Neurosci Methods; 2009 Jun; 180(2):363-73. PubMed ID: 19464523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Electrophysiological spread of excitation and pitch perception for dual and single electrodes using the Nucleus Freedom cochlear implant.
    Busby PA; Battmer RD; Pesch J
    Ear Hear; 2008 Dec; 29(6):853-64. PubMed ID: 18633324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. An introduction to the biophysics of the electrically evoked compound action potential.
    Rubinstein JT
    Int J Audiol; 2004 Dec; 43 Suppl 1():S3-9. PubMed ID: 15732375
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Recording and analysis of electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs) with MED-EL cochlear implants and different artifact reduction strategies in Matlab.
    Bahmer A; Peter O; Baumann U
    J Neurosci Methods; 2010 Aug; 191(1):66-74. PubMed ID: 20558202
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Intracochlear and extracochlear ECAPs suggest antidromic action potentials.
    Miller CA; Abbas PJ; Hay-McCutcheon MJ; Robinson BK; Nourski KV; Jeng FC
    Hear Res; 2004 Dec; 198(1-2):75-86. PubMed ID: 15567605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Excitation patterns of simultaneous and sequential dual-electrode stimulation in cochlear implant recipients.
    Saoji AA; Litvak LM; Hughes ML
    Ear Hear; 2009 Oct; 30(5):559-67. PubMed ID: 19617837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Unraveling the electrically evoked compound action potential.
    Briaire JJ; Frijns JH
    Hear Res; 2005 Jul; 205(1-2):143-56. PubMed ID: 15953524
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Predicting dynamic range and intensity discrimination for electrical pulse-train stimuli using a stochastic auditory nerve model: the effects of stimulus noise.
    Xu Y; Collins LM
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2005 Jun; 52(6):1040-9. PubMed ID: 15977734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. The effect of the resistive properties of bone on neural excitation and electric fields in cochlear implant models.
    Malherbe TK; Hanekom T; Hanekom JJ
    Hear Res; 2015 Sep; 327():126-35. PubMed ID: 26074305
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Frequency-specific electrocochleography indicates that presynaptic and postsynaptic mechanisms of auditory neuropathy exist.
    McMahon CM; Patuzzi RB; Gibson WP; Sanli H
    Ear Hear; 2008 Jun; 29(3):314-25. PubMed ID: 18344874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Generalized alternating stimulation: a novel method to reduce stimulus artifact in electrically evoked compound action potentials.
    Alvarez I; de la Torre A; Sainz M; Roldan C; Schoesser H; Spitzer P
    J Neurosci Methods; 2007 Sep; 165(1):95-103. PubMed ID: 17624444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Electrode interaction in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of straight and contour electrode arrays.
    Xi X; Ji F; Han D; Hong M; Chen A
    ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec; 2009; 71(4):228-37. PubMed ID: 19707042
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. [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]  

  • 14. Long-term sensorineural hearing loss induces functional changes in the rat auditory nerve.
    Shepherd RK; Roberts LA; Paolini AG
    Eur J Neurosci; 2004 Dec; 20(11):3131-40. PubMed ID: 15579167
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. An improved masker-probe method for stimulus artifact reduction in electrically evoked compound action potentials.
    Alvarez I; de la Torre A; Sainz M; Roldan C; Schoesser H; Spitzer P
    J Neurosci Methods; 2008 Oct; 175(1):143-7. PubMed ID: 18771694
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Stimulus level effects on neural excitation and eCAP amplitude.
    Westen AA; Dekker DM; Briaire JJ; Frijns JH
    Hear Res; 2011 Oct; 280(1-2):166-76. PubMed ID: 21664959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. A comparison of intra- versus post-operatively acquired electrically evoked compound action potentials.
    van Wermeskerken GK; van Olphen AF; van Zanten GA
    Int J Audiol; 2006 Oct; 45(10):589-94. PubMed ID: 17062500
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 5. refractory recovery and facilitation.
    Cohen LT
    Hear Res; 2009 Feb; 248(1-2):1-14. PubMed ID: 19110048
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 4. model development at low pulse rates: general model and application to individuals.
    Cohen LT
    Hear Res; 2009 Feb; 248(1-2):15-30. PubMed ID: 19110049
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Further prospective findings with compound action potentials from Nucleus 24 cochlear implants.
    Polak M; Hodges AV; King JE; Balkany TJ
    Hear Res; 2004 Feb; 188(1-2):104-16. PubMed ID: 14759574
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 15.