195 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 19850116)
1. Recording of electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses after electrical stimulation with biphasic, triphasic and precision triphasic pulses.
Bahmer A; Polak M; Baumann U
Hear Res; 2010 Jan; 259(1-2):75-85. PubMed ID: 19850116
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Application of triphasic pulses with adjustable phase amplitude ratio (PAR) for cochlear ECAP recording: I. amplitude growth functions.
Bahmer A; Baumann U
J Neurosci Methods; 2012 Mar; 205(1):202-11. PubMed ID: 22209768
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effect of increasing duration of stimulation on the electrically evoked auditory brainstem and middle latency responses in pediatric cochlear implant users.
Davids T; Valero J; Papsin BC; Harrison RV; Gordon KA
J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 2008 Aug; 37(4):559-64. PubMed ID: 19128593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Effects of stimulus manipulation on electrophysiological responses of pediatric cochlear implant users. Part II: rate effects.
Davids T; Valero J; Papsin BC; Harrison RV; Gordon KA
Hear Res; 2008 Oct; 244(1-2):15-24. PubMed ID: 18692122
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Auditory brainstem activity and development evoked by apical versus basal cochlear implant electrode stimulation in children.
Gordon KA; Papsin BC; Harrison RV
Clin Neurophysiol; 2007 Aug; 118(8):1671-84. PubMed ID: 17588811
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Quantitative analysis of electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses in implanted children with auditory neuropathy/dyssynchrony.
Runge-Samuelson CL; Drake S; Wackym PA
Otol Neurotol; 2008 Feb; 29(2):174-8. PubMed ID: 18025997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Application of triphasic pulses with adjustable phase amplitude ratio (PAR) for cochlear ECAP recording: II. recovery functions.
Bahmer A; Baumann U
J Neurosci Methods; 2012 Mar; 205(1):212-20. PubMed ID: 22202890
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparisons between neural response imaging thresholds, electrically evoked auditory reflex thresholds and most comfortable loudness levels in CII bionic ear users with HiResolution sound processing strategies.
Han DM; Chen XQ; Zhao XT; Kong Y; Li YX; Liu S; Liu B; Mo LY
Acta Otolaryngol; 2005 Jul; 125(7):732-5. PubMed ID: 16012035
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Effects of auditory pathway anatomy and deafness characteristics? Part 2: On electrically evoked late auditory responses.
Guiraud J; Gallego S; Arnold L; Boyle P; Truy E; Collet L
Hear Res; 2007 Jun; 228(1-2):44-57. PubMed ID: 17350776
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Abnormal timing delays in auditory brainstem responses evoked by bilateral cochlear implant use in children.
Gordon KA; Valero J; van Hoesel R; Papsin BC
Otol Neurotol; 2008 Feb; 29(2):193-8. PubMed ID: 18223446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Electrically evoked auditory brainstem response in cochlear implant users.
Hey M; Kevanishvili I; von Specht H; Begall K; Kevanishvili Z
Georgian Med News; 2007 Jun; (147):43-9. PubMed ID: 17660600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Use of electrophysiologic measures in the management of children with cochlear implants: brainstem, middle latency, and cognitive (P300) responses.
Kileny PR
Am J Otol; 1991; 12 Suppl():37-42; discussion 43-7. PubMed ID: 2069187
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Impact of modulating phase duration on electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses obtained during cochlear implantation.
Bonne NX; Douchement D; Hosana G; Desruelles J; Fayoux P; Ruzza I; Vincent C
Cochlear Implants Int; 2015 May; 16(3):168-74. PubMed ID: 25167217
[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. 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]
17. Effect of high-frequency electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve in an animal model of cochlear implants.
Vischer M; Haenggeli A; Zhang J; Pelizzone M; Häusler R; Rouiller EM
Am J Otol; 1997 Nov; 18(6 Suppl):S27-9. PubMed ID: 9391586
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Speech auditory brainstem response (speech ABR) characteristics depending on recording conditions, and hearing status: an experimental parametric study.
Akhoun I; Moulin A; Jeanvoine A; Ménard M; Buret F; Vollaire C; Scorretti R; Veuillet E; Berger-Vachon C; Collet L; Thai-Van H
J Neurosci Methods; 2008 Nov; 175(2):196-205. PubMed ID: 18789971
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Auditory neuropathy: an update.
Gibson WP; Sanli H
Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2 Suppl):102S-106S. PubMed ID: 17496659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses in adults and children: effects of lateral to medial placement of the nucleus 24 contour electrode array.
Runge-Samuelson C; Firszt JB; Gaggl W; Wackym PA
Otol Neurotol; 2009 Jun; 30(4):464-70. PubMed ID: 19300297
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
