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 *

115 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 2076982)

  • 1. Effects of level on nonspectral frequency difference limens for electrical and acoustic stimuli.
    Pfingst BE; Rai DT
    Hear Res; 1990 Dec; 50(1-2):43-56. PubMed ID: 2076982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effects of stimulus level on nonspectral frequency discrimination by human subjects.
    Pfingst BE; Holloway LA; Poopat N; Subramanya AR; Warren MF; Zwolan TA
    Hear Res; 1994 Aug; 78(2):197-209. PubMed ID: 7982813
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Intensity discrimination with cochlear implants.
    Pfingst BE; Burnett PA; Sutton D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1983 Apr; 73(4):1283-92. PubMed ID: 6687893
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Comparison of spectral and nonspectral frequency difference limens for human and nonhuman primates.
    Pfingst BE
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1993 Apr; 93(4 Pt 1):2124-9. PubMed ID: 8473625
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Auditory detection and discrimination in deaf cats: psychophysical and neural thresholds for intracochlear electrical signals.
    Vollmer M; Beitel RE; Snyder RL
    J Neurophysiol; 2001 Nov; 86(5):2330-43. PubMed ID: 11698523
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Electrode discrimination by early-deafened subjects using the cochlear limited multiple-electrode cochlear implant.
    Busby PA; Clark GM
    Ear Hear; 2000 Aug; 21(4):291-304. PubMed ID: 10981605
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Intensity discrimination as a function of stimulus level with electric stimulation.
    Nelson DA; Schmitz JL; Donaldson GS; Viemeister NF; Javel E
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1996 Oct; 100(4 Pt 1):2393-414. PubMed ID: 8865646
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Speech perception with combined electric-acoustic stimulation and bilateral cochlear implants in a multisource noise field.
    Rader T; Fastl H; Baumann U
    Ear Hear; 2013; 34(3):324-32. PubMed ID: 23263408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effect of stimulus duration on stapedius reflex threshold in electrical stimulation via cochlear implant.
    Stephan K; Welzl-Müller K
    Audiology; 1994; 33(3):143-51. PubMed ID: 8042935
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Fitting prelingually deafened adult cochlear implant users based on electrode discrimination performance.
    Debruyne JA; Francart T; Janssen AM; Douma K; Brokx JP
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Mar; 56(3):174-185. PubMed ID: 27758152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Frequency modulation detection in cochlear implant subjects.
    Chen H; Zeng FG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2004 Oct; 116(4 Pt 1):2269-77. PubMed ID: 15532658
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Lateralization of interimplant timing and level differences in children who use bilateral cochlear implants.
    Salloum CA; Valero J; Wong DD; Papsin BC; van Hoesel R; Gordon KA
    Ear Hear; 2010 Aug; 31(4):441-56. PubMed ID: 20489647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Using Neural Response Telemetry to Monitor Physiological Responses to Acoustic Stimulation in Hybrid Cochlear Implant Users.
    Abbas PJ; Tejani VD; Scheperle RA; Brown CJ
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(4):409-425. PubMed ID: 28085738
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Amplitude and pulse rate difference limens for electrical stimulation of the cochlea following graded degeneration of the auditory nerve.
    Black RC; Steel AC; Clark GM
    Acta Otolaryngol; 1983; 95(1-2):27-33. PubMed ID: 6687505
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. 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]  

  • 19. Chronic intracochlear electrical stimulation in the neonatally deafened cat. I: Expansion of central representation.
    Snyder RL; Rebscher SJ; Cao KL; Leake PA; Kelly K
    Hear Res; 1990 Dec; 50(1-2):7-33. PubMed ID: 2076984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Electrical cochlear stimulation in the deaf cat: comparisons between psychophysical and central auditory neuronal thresholds.
    Beitel RE; Snyder RL; Schreiner CE; Raggio MW; Leake PA
    J Neurophysiol; 2000 Apr; 83(4):2145-62. PubMed ID: 10758124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.