454 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31846976)
21. Assessing the Relationship Between the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential and Speech Recognition Abilities in Bilateral Cochlear Implant Recipients.
Schvartz-Leyzac KC; Pfingst BE
Ear Hear; 2018; 39(2):344-358. PubMed ID: 28885234
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Intraoperative Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential (ECAP) Measurements in Traditional and Hearing Preservation Cochlear Implantation.
Nassiri AM; Yawn RJ; Gifford RH; Haynes DS; Roberts JB; Gilbane MS; Murfee J; Bennett ML
J Am Acad Audiol; 2019; 30(10):918-926. PubMed ID: 31274070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. SpeedCAP: An Efficient Method for Estimating Neural Activation Patterns Using Electrically Evoked Compound Action-Potentials in Cochlear Implant Users.
Garcia C; Deeks JM; Goehring T; Borsetto D; Bance M; Carlyon RP
Ear Hear; 2023 May-Jun 01; 44(3):627-640. PubMed ID: 36477611
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Assessing the Electrode-Neuron Interface with the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential, Electrode Position, and Behavioral Thresholds.
DeVries L; Scheperle R; Bierer JA
J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2016 Jun; 17(3):237-52. PubMed ID: 26926152
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Impact of cochlear tonotopy on electrically evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs).
Christov F; Gluth MB; Hans S; Lang S; Arweiler-Harbeck D
Acta Otolaryngol; 2019 Jan; 139(1):22-26. PubMed ID: 30652918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Investigating the association of electrically-evoked compound action potential thresholds with inner-ear dimensions in pediatric cochlear implantation.
Söderqvist S; Sivonen V; Lamminmäki S; Ylönen J; Markkola A; Sinkkonen ST
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2022 Jul; 158():111160. PubMed ID: 35544967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. [Electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds of pediatric cochlear implant recipients and its clinical application].
Xi X; Hong MD; Han DY; Huang DL; Yang WY
Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi; 2003 Feb; 38(1):43-6. PubMed ID: 12778767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Speech perception in nucleus CI24M cochlear implant users with processor settings based on electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds.
Smoorenburg GF; Willeboer C; van Dijk JE
Audiol Neurootol; 2002; 7(6):335-47. PubMed ID: 12401965
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Effects of long-term use of a cochlear implant on the electrically evoked compound action potential.
Brown CJ; Abbas PJ; Etlert CP; O'Brient S; Oleson JJ
J Am Acad Audiol; 2010 Jan; 21(1):5-15. PubMed ID: 20085195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. ECAP analysis in cochlear implant patients as a function of patient's age and electrode-design.
Christov F; Munder P; Berg L; Bagus H; Lang S; Arweiler-Harbeck D
Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis; 2016 Jun; 133 Suppl 1():S1-3. PubMed ID: 27262349
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. A comparison of intra- versus post-operatively acquired electrically evoked compound action potentials.
van Wermeskerken GK; van Olphen AF; van Zanten GA
Int J Audiol; 2006 Oct; 45(10):589-94. PubMed ID: 17062500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Evolution of cochlear implant arrays result in changes in behavioral and physiological responses in children.
Gordin A; Papsin B; James A; Gordon K
Otol Neurotol; 2009 Oct; 30(7):908-15. PubMed ID: 19730148
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The Effect of Electrode Position on Behavioral and Electrophysiologic Measurements in Perimodiolar Cochlear Implants.
Collins A; Foghsgaard S; Druce E; Margani V; Mejia O; O'Leary S
Otol Neurotol; 2024 Mar; 45(3):238-244. PubMed ID: 38238914
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. [Electrically evoked auditory nerve compound action potentials in Nucleus CI24M cochlear implant users].
Zhu X; Cao K; Pan T; Yang H; Wang Y
Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi; 2002 Jan; 16(1):5-8. PubMed ID: 11944479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Modiolar coiling, electrical thresholds, and speech perception after cochlear implantation using the nucleus contour advance electrode with the advance off stylet technique.
Huang TC; Reitzen SD; Marrinan MS; Waltzman SB; Roland JT
Otol Neurotol; 2006 Feb; 27(2):159-66. PubMed ID: 16436984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Slim, Modiolar Cochlear Implant Electrode: Melbourne Experience and Comparison With the Contour Perimodiolar Electrode.
Shaul C; Weder S; Tari S; Gerard JM; O'Leary SJ; Briggs RJ
Otol Neurotol; 2020 Jun; 41(5):639-643. PubMed ID: 32150026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. The relationship between the intraoperative ECAP threshold and postoperative behavioral levels: the difference between postlingually deafened adults and prelingually deafened pediatric cochlear implant users.
Morita T; Naito Y; Hirai T; Yamaguchi S; Ito J
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2003 Feb; 260(2):67-72. PubMed ID: 12582781
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Matched Cohort Comparison Indicates Superiority of Precurved Electrode Arrays.
Holder JT; Yawn RJ; Nassiri AM; Dwyer RT; Rivas A; Labadie RF; Gifford RH
Otol Neurotol; 2019 Oct; 40(9):1160-1166. PubMed ID: 31469799
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Effect of cochlear implant electrode array design on auditory nerve and behavioral response in children.
Telmesani LM; Said NM
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2015 May; 79(5):660-5. PubMed ID: 25746517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Comparing eSRT and eCAP measurements in pediatric MED-EL cochlear implant users.
Kosaner J; Spitzer P; Bayguzina S; Gultekin M; Behar LA
Cochlear Implants Int; 2018 May; 19(3):153-161. PubMed ID: 29291688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
