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 *

203 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22234161)

  • 1. Semi-automatic attenuation of cochlear implant artifacts for the evaluation of late auditory evoked potentials.
    Viola FC; De Vos M; Hine J; Sandmann P; Bleeck S; Eyles J; Debener S
    Hear Res; 2012 Feb; 284(1-2):6-15. PubMed ID: 22234161
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Source localization of auditory evoked potentials after cochlear implantation.
    Debener S; Hine J; Bleeck S; Eyles J
    Psychophysiology; 2008 Jan; 45(1):20-4. PubMed ID: 17910729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Validation of the cochlear implant artifact correction tool for auditory electrophysiology.
    Miller S; Zhang Y
    Neurosci Lett; 2014 Aug; 577():51-5. PubMed ID: 24946164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Uncovering auditory evoked potentials from cochlear implant users with independent component analysis.
    Viola FC; Thorne JD; Bleeck S; Eyles J; Debener S
    Psychophysiology; 2011 Nov; 48(11):1470-1480. PubMed ID: 21635266
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Cochlear implant artifact attenuation in late auditory evoked potentials: a single channel approach.
    Mc Laughlin M; Lopez Valdes A; Reilly RB; Zeng FG
    Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 302():84-95. PubMed ID: 23727626
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. A novel method for device-related electroencephalography artifact suppression to explore cochlear implant-related cortical changes in single-sided deafness.
    Kim K; Punte AK; Mertens G; Van de Heyning P; Park KJ; Choi H; Choi JW; Song JJ
    J Neurosci Methods; 2015 Nov; 255():22-8. PubMed ID: 26231621
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Minimization of cochlear implant artifact in cortical auditory evoked potentials in children.
    Bakhos D; Roux S; Robier A; Bonnet-Brilhault F; Lescanne E; Bruneau N
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2012 Nov; 76(11):1627-32. PubMed ID: 22910837
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Independent component analysis for auditory evoked potentials and cochlear implant artifact estimation.
    Castañeda-Villa N; James CJ
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2011 Feb; 58(2):348-54. PubMed ID: 20813628
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Evaluation of evoked potentials to dyadic tones after cochlear implantation.
    Sandmann P; Eichele T; Buechler M; Debener S; Jäncke L; Dillier N; Hugdahl K; Meyer M
    Brain; 2009 Jul; 132(Pt 7):1967-79. PubMed ID: 19293240
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Independent component analysis for cochlear implant artifacts attenuation from electrically evoked auditory steady-state response measurements.
    Deprez H; Gransier R; Hofmann M; van Wieringen A; Wouters J; Moonen M
    J Neural Eng; 2018 Feb; 15(1):016006. PubMed ID: 29211684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Electrophysiological and speech perception measures of auditory processing in experienced adult cochlear implant users.
    Kelly AS; Purdy SC; Thorne PR
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2005 Jun; 116(6):1235-46. PubMed ID: 15978485
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Auditory steady state responses and cochlear implants: Modeling the artifact-response mixture in the perspective of denoising.
    Mina F; Attina V; Duroc Y; Veuillet E; Truy E; Thai-Van H
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(3):e0174462. PubMed ID: 28350887
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials Recorded From Nucleus Hybrid Cochlear Implant Users.
    Brown CJ; Jeon EK; Chiou LK; Kirby B; Karsten SA; Turner CW; Abbas PJ
    Ear Hear; 2015; 36(6):723-32. PubMed ID: 26295607
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Characterizing responses from auditory cortex in young people with several years of cochlear implant experience.
    Gordon KA; Tanaka S; Wong DD; Papsin BC
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2008 Oct; 119(10):2347-62. PubMed ID: 18752993
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Minimization of cochlear implant stimulus artifact in cortical auditory evoked potentials.
    Gilley PM; Sharma A; Dorman M; Finley CC; Panch AS; Martin K
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2006 Aug; 117(8):1772-82. PubMed ID: 16807102
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The adaptive pattern of the late auditory evoked potential elicited by repeated stimuli in cochlear implant users.
    Zhang F; Anderson J; Samy R; Houston L
    Int J Audiol; 2010 Apr; 49(4):277-85. PubMed ID: 20151878
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Objective source selection in Blind Source Separation of AEPs in children with Cochlear Implants.
    Castañeda-Villa N; James CJ
    Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2007; 2007():6224-7. PubMed ID: 18003443
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Of kittens and kids: altered cortical maturation following profound deafness and cochlear implant use.
    Ponton CW; Eggermont JJ
    Audiol Neurootol; 2001; 6(6):363-80. PubMed ID: 11847464
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. A New Method to Test the Efficiency of Cochlear Implant Artifacts Removal From Auditory Evoked Potentials.
    Attina V; Mina F; Stahl P; Duroc Y; Veuillet E; Truy E; Thai-Van H
    IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng; 2017 Dec; 25(12):2453-2460. PubMed ID: 28692981
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 11.