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 *

136 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21895094)

  • 1. Discrimination between sequential and simultaneous virtual channels with electrical hearing.
    Landsberger D; Galvin JJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1559-66. PubMed ID: 21895094
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Loudness and pitch perception using Dynamically Compensated Virtual Channels.
    Nogueira W; Litvak LM; Landsberger DM; Büchner A
    Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():223-234. PubMed ID: 27939418
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of stimulation configurations on place pitch discrimination in cochlear implants.
    Kwon BJ; Perry TT; Olmstead VL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jun; 129(6):3818-26. PubMed ID: 21682405
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Current focusing sharpens local peaks of excitation in cochlear implant stimulation.
    Srinivasan AG; Landsberger DM; Shannon RV
    Hear Res; 2010 Dec; 270(1-2):89-100. PubMed ID: 20850513
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Encoding pitch contours using current steering.
    Luo X; Landsberger DM; Padilla M; Srinivasan AG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 Sep; 128(3):1215-23. PubMed ID: 20815457
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Detection and rate discrimination of amplitude modulation in electrical hearing.
    Chatterjee M; Oberzut C
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Sep; 130(3):1567-80. PubMed ID: 21895095
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Detection of acoustic temporal fine structure by cochlear implant listeners: behavioral results and computational modeling.
    Imennov NS; Won JH; Drennan WR; Jameyson E; Rubinstein JT
    Hear Res; 2013 Apr; 298():60-72. PubMed ID: 23333260
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Cochlear-implant spatial selectivity with monopolar, bipolar and tripolar stimulation.
    Zhu Z; Tang Q; Zeng FG; Guan T; Ye D
    Hear Res; 2012 Jan; 283(1-2):45-58. PubMed ID: 22138630
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Masking patterns for monopolar and phantom electrode stimulation in cochlear implants.
    Saoji AA; Landsberger DM; Padilla M; Litvak LM
    Hear Res; 2013 Apr; 298():109-16. PubMed ID: 23299125
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Perceptual changes with monopolar and phantom electrode stimulation.
    Klawitter S; Landsberger DM; Büchner A; Nogueira W
    Hear Res; 2018 Mar; 359():64-75. PubMed ID: 29325874
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Spatial tuning curves from apical, middle, and basal electrodes in cochlear implant users.
    Nelson DA; Kreft HA; Anderson ES; Donaldson GS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2011 Jun; 129(6):3916-33. PubMed ID: 21682414
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Temporal modulation transfer functions in cochlear implantees using a method that limits overall loudness cues.
    Fraser M; McKay CM
    Hear Res; 2012 Jan; 283(1-2):59-69. PubMed ID: 22146425
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Pitch ranking, electrode discrimination, and physiological spread-of-excitation using Cochlear's dual-electrode mode.
    Goehring JL; Neff DL; Baudhuin JL; Hughes ML
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2014 Aug; 136(2):715-27. PubMed ID: 25096106
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Speech perception with interaction-compensated simultaneous stimulation and long pulse durations in cochlear implant users.
    Schatzer R; Koroleva I; Griessner A; Levin S; Kusovkov V; Yanov Y; Zierhofer C
    Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 322():99-106. PubMed ID: 25457654
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Relationship between channel interaction and spectral-ripple discrimination in cochlear implant users.
    Jones GL; Won JH; Drennan WR; Rubinstein JT
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jan; 133(1):425-33. PubMed ID: 23297914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Adding simultaneous stimulating channels to reduce power consumption in cochlear implants.
    Langner F; Saoji AA; Büchner A; Nogueira W
    Hear Res; 2017 Mar; 345():96-107. PubMed ID: 28104408
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Dynamic current steering with phantom electrode in cochlear implants.
    Luo X; Garrett C
    Hear Res; 2020 May; 390():107949. PubMed ID: 32200300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Central masking with bilateral cochlear implants.
    Lin P; Lu T; Zeng FG
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Feb; 133(2):962-9. PubMed ID: 23363113
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Voice gender discrimination provides a measure of more than pitch-related perception in cochlear implant users.
    Li T; Fu QJ
    Int J Audiol; 2011 Aug; 50(8):498-502. PubMed ID: 21696330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Objective assessment of electrode discrimination with the auditory change complex in adult cochlear implant users.
    Mathew R; Undurraga J; Li G; Meerton L; Boyle P; Shaida A; Selvadurai D; Jiang D; Vickers D
    Hear Res; 2017 Oct; 354():86-101. PubMed ID: 28826636
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.