194 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24921595)
1. A partial hearing animal model for chronic electro-acoustic stimulation.
Irving S; Wise AK; Millard RE; Shepherd RK; Fallon JB
J Neural Eng; 2014 Aug; 11(4):046008. PubMed ID: 24921595
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effects of an enhanced acoustic environment on residual hearing following chronic cochlear implantation and electrical stimulation in the partially deafened cat.
Wise AK; Atkinson P; Fallon JB
Hear Res; 2022 Dec; 426():108635. PubMed ID: 36306607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Morphological correlates of hearing loss after cochlear implantation and electro-acoustic stimulation in a hearing-impaired Guinea pig model.
Reiss LA; Stark G; Nguyen-Huynh AT; Spear KA; Zhang H; Tanaka C; Li H
Hear Res; 2015 Sep; 327():163-74. PubMed ID: 26087114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Electric-Acoustic Stimulation After Reimplantation: Hearing Preservation and Speech Perception.
Thompson NJ; Dillon MT; Bucker AL; King ER; Pillsbury HC; Brown KD
Otol Neurotol; 2019 Feb; 40(2):e94-e98. PubMed ID: 30624400
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Phantom Stimulation for Cochlear Implant Users With Residual Low-Frequency Hearing.
Krüger B; Büchner A; Nogueira W
Ear Hear; 2022; 43(2):631-645. PubMed ID: 34593687
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Factors associated with hearing loss in a normal-hearing guinea pig model of Hybrid cochlear implants.
Tanaka C; Nguyen-Huynh A; Loera K; Stark G; Reiss L
Hear Res; 2014 Oct; 316():82-93. PubMed ID: 25128626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Electroacoustic stimulation: now and into the future.
Irving S; Gillespie L; Richardson R; Rowe D; Fallon JB; Wise AK
Biomed Res Int; 2014; 2014():350504. PubMed ID: 25276779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Acceptance and Benefits of Electro-Acoustic Stimulation for Conventional-Length Electrode Arrays.
Spitzer ER; Waltzman SB; Landsberger DM; Friedmann DR
Audiol Neurootol; 2021; 26(1):17-26. PubMed ID: 32721977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. Does cochlear implantation and electrical stimulation affect residual hair cells and spiral ganglion neurons?
Coco A; Epp SB; Fallon JB; Xu J; Millard RE; Shepherd RK
Hear Res; 2007 Mar; 225(1-2):60-70. PubMed ID: 17258411
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Bilateral electric acoustic stimulation: a comparison of partial and deep cochlear electrode insertion. A longitudinal case study.
Kleine Punte A; Vermeire K; Van de Heyning P
Adv Otorhinolaryngol; 2010; 67():144-152. PubMed ID: 19955731
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Simultaneous masking between electric and acoustic stimulation in cochlear implant users with residual low-frequency hearing.
Krüger B; Büchner A; Nogueira W
Hear Res; 2017 Sep; 353():185-196. PubMed ID: 28688755
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Longitudinal Electrocochleography as an Objective Measure of Serial Behavioral Audiometry in Electro-Acoustic Stimulation Patients.
Tejani VD; Kim JS; Etler CP; Skidmore J; Yuan Y; He S; Hansen MR; Gantz BJ; Abbas PJ; Brown CJ
Ear Hear; 2023 Sep-Oct 01; 44(5):1014-1028. PubMed ID: 36790447
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Is electric acoustic stimulation better than conventional cochlear implantation for speech perception in quiet?
Adunka OF; Pillsbury HC; Adunka MC; Buchman CA
Otol Neurotol; 2010 Sep; 31(7):1049-54. PubMed ID: 20351607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Short-term observation of electrical acoustic stimulation in patients with low frequency residual hearing after cochlear implant].
Wang RJ; Luo JF; Chao XH; Hu FX; Fan ZM; Xu L; Wang HB
Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2023 Dec; 58(12):1173-1182. PubMed ID: 38186091
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. Binaural cue sensitivity in cochlear implant recipients with acoustic hearing preservation.
Gifford RH; Stecker GC
Hear Res; 2020 May; 390():107929. PubMed ID: 32182551
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Acoustically Evoked Compound Action Potentials Recorded From Cochlear Implant Users With Preserved Acoustic Hearing.
Kim JS; Brown CJ
Ear Hear; 2023 Sep-Oct 01; 44(5):1061-1077. PubMed ID: 36882917
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Chronic electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve at high stimulus rates: a physiological and histopathological study.
Xu J; Shepherd RK; Millard RE; Clark GM
Hear Res; 1997 Mar; 105(1-2):1-29. PubMed ID: 9083801
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A physiologically-inspired model reproducing the speech intelligibility benefit in cochlear implant listeners with residual acoustic hearing.
Zamaninezhad L; Hohmann V; Büchner A; Schädler MR; Jürgens T
Hear Res; 2017 Feb; 344():50-61. PubMed ID: 27838372
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
