328 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26631108)
1. Comparison of Interaural Electrode Pairing Methods for Bilateral Cochlear Implants.
Hu H; Dietz M
Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26631108
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Suitability of the Binaural Interaction Component for Interaural Electrode Pairing of Bilateral Cochlear Implants.
Hu H; Kollmeier B; Dietz M
Adv Exp Med Biol; 2016; 894():57-64. PubMed ID: 27080646
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effects of interaural pitch matching and auditory image centering on binaural sensitivity in cochlear implant users.
Kan A; Litovsky RY; Goupell MJ
Ear Hear; 2015; 36(3):e62-8. PubMed ID: 25565660
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Using evoked potentials to match interaural electrode pairs with bilateral cochlear implants.
Smith ZM; Delgutte B
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2007 Mar; 8(1):134-51. PubMed ID: 17225976
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Preliminary results of the relationship between the binaural interaction component of the electrically evoked auditory brainstem response and interaural pitch comparisons in bilateral cochlear implant recipients.
He S; Brown CJ; Abbas PJ
Ear Hear; 2012; 33(1):57-68. PubMed ID: 21730858
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Binaural sensitivity as a function of interaural electrode position with a bilateral cochlear implant user.
Long CJ; Eddington DK; Colburn HS; Rabinowitz WM
J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Sep; 114(3):1565-74. PubMed ID: 14514210
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Effects of stimulation level and electrode pairing on the binaural interaction component of the electrically evoked auditory brain stem response.
He S; Brown CJ; Abbas PJ
Ear Hear; 2010 Aug; 31(4):457-70. PubMed ID: 20418771
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Cortical Representation of Interaural Time Difference Is Impaired by Deafness in Development: Evidence from Children with Early Long-term Access to Sound through Bilateral Cochlear Implants Provided Simultaneously.
Easwar V; Yamazaki H; Deighton M; Papsin B; Gordon K
J Neurosci; 2017 Mar; 37(9):2349-2361. PubMed ID: 28123078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Interaural Place-of-Stimulation Mismatch Estimates Using CT Scans and Binaural Perception, But Not Pitch, Are Consistent in Cochlear-Implant Users.
Bernstein JGW; Jensen KK; Stakhovskaya OA; Noble JH; Hoa M; Kim HJ; Shih R; Kolberg E; Cleary M; Goupell MJ
J Neurosci; 2021 Dec; 41(49):10161-10178. PubMed ID: 34725189
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Channel Interaction and Current Level Affect Across-Electrode Integration of Interaural Time Differences in Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Listeners.
Egger K; Majdak P; Laback B
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2016 Feb; 17(1):55-67. PubMed ID: 26377826
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Sensitivity to interaural level and envelope time differences of two bilateral cochlear implant listeners using clinical sound processors.
Laback B; Pok SM; Baumgartner WD; Deutsch WA; Schmid K
Ear Hear; 2004 Oct; 25(5):488-500. PubMed ID: 15599195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Interaural stimulation timing in single sided deaf cochlear implant users.
Zirn S; Arndt S; Aschendorff A; Wesarg T
Hear Res; 2015 Oct; 328():148-56. PubMed ID: 26302945
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Perception and coding of interaural time differences with bilateral cochlear implants.
Laback B; Egger K; Majdak P
Hear Res; 2015 Apr; 322():138-50. PubMed ID: 25456088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Interaural frequency mismatch jointly modulates neural brainstem binaural interaction and behavioral interaural time difference sensitivity in humans.
Sammeth CA; Brown AD; Greene NT; Tollin DJ
Hear Res; 2023 Sep; 437():108839. PubMed ID: 37429100
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The Relationship Between Interaural Insertion-Depth Differences, Scalar Location, and Interaural Time-Difference Processing in Adult Bilateral Cochlear-Implant Listeners.
Cleary M; Bernstein JGW; Stakhovskaya OA; Noble J; Kolberg E; Jensen KK; Hoa M; Kim HJ; Goupell MJ
Trends Hear; 2022; 26():23312165221129165. PubMed ID: 36379607
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Auditory Model-Based Sound Direction Estimation With Bilateral Cochlear Implants.
Kelvasa D; Dietz M
Trends Hear; 2015 Dec; 19():. PubMed ID: 26631106
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The Effect of Simulated Interaural Frequency Mismatch on Speech Understanding and Spatial Release From Masking.
Goupell MJ; Stoelb CA; Kan A; Litovsky RY
Ear Hear; 2018; 39(5):895-905. PubMed ID: 29337763
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Rate dependent neural responses of interaural-time-difference cues in fine-structure and envelope.
Hu H; Ewert SD; Kollmeier B; Vickers D
PeerJ; 2024; 12():e17104. PubMed ID: 38680894
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Relationships between electrically evoked potentials and loudness growth in bilateral cochlear implant users.
Kirby B; Brown C; Abbas P; Etler C; O'Brien S
Ear Hear; 2012; 33(3):389-98. PubMed ID: 22246138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
