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 *

152 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3187380)

  • 1. Interaction of click polarity, stimulus level, and repetition rate on the auditory brainstem response.
    Beattie RC
    Scand Audiol; 1988; 17(2):99-109. PubMed ID: 3187380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Stimulus dependencies of the gerbil brain-stem auditory-evoked response (BAER). I: Effects of click level, rate, and polarity.
    Burkard R; Voigt HF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1989 Jun; 85(6):2514-25. PubMed ID: 2745876
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of click polarity on the auditory brainstem responses of older men.
    Rawool VW
    Audiology; 1998; 37(2):100-8. PubMed ID: 9547923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Evaluation of waveform, latency and amplitude values of chirp ABR in newborns.
    Cebulla M; Lurz H; Shehata-Dieler W
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2014 Apr; 78(4):631-6. PubMed ID: 24529909
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Which stimulus should be used for auditory brainstem response in newborns; CE-Chirp® level specific versus Click stimulus.
    Kaynakoğlu B; Ceyhan S
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2023 Jul; 170():111597. PubMed ID: 37178522
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Auditory brainstem response with click and CE-Chirp® Level Specific stimuli in hearing infants.
    Ormundo DDS; Lewis DR
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2021 Aug; 147():110819. PubMed ID: 34198155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparison of binaural auditory brainstem responses and the binaural difference potential evoked by chirps and clicks.
    Riedel H; Kollmeier B
    Hear Res; 2002 Jul; 169(1-2):85-96. PubMed ID: 12121742
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison between auditory brain stem responses evoked by rarefaction and condensation step functions and clicks.
    Tietze G; Pantev C
    Audiology; 1986; 25(1):44-53. PubMed ID: 3954683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. On the use of click-evoked electric brainstem responses in audiological diagnosis. I. The variability of the normal response.
    Rosenhamer HJ; Lindström B; Lundborg T
    Scand Audiol; 1978; 7(4):193-205. PubMed ID: 756085
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. High click stimulus repetition rate in the auditory evoked potentials in multiple sclerosis patients with normal MRI. Does it improve diagnosis?
    Santos MA; Munhoz MS; Peixoto MA; Silva CS
    Rev Laryngol Otol Rhinol (Bord); 2004; 125(3):151-5. PubMed ID: 15605430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Compound action potentials recorded from the intracranial portion of the auditory nerve in man: effects of stimulus intensity and polarity.
    Møller AR; Jho HD
    Audiology; 1991; 30(3):142-63. PubMed ID: 1953444
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Click polarity inversion effects upon the human brainstem auditory evoked potential.
    Kevanishvili Z; Aphonchenko V
    Scand Audiol; 1981; 10(3):141-7. PubMed ID: 7302521
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Electrocochleography and Auditory Brainstem Responses in Persons with Non-Optimal Blood Pressure.
    Baiduc RR; Berry CM; Lemons K; Vance EA
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2021 Oct; 32(9):576-587. PubMed ID: 35176801
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The combined effects of forward masking by noise and high click rate on monaural and binaural human auditory nerve and brainstem potentials.
    Pratt H; Polyakov A; Bleich N; Mittelman N
    Hear Res; 2004 Jul; 193(1-2):83-94. PubMed ID: 15219323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Analysis of click-evoked auditory brainstem responses using time domain cross-correlations between interleaved responses.
    Berninger E; Olofsson A; Leijon A
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(3):318-29. PubMed ID: 24557002
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Test-retest variability of the auditory brainstem response to bone-conducted clicks in newborn infants.
    Yang EY; Stuart A; Stenstrom R; Green WB
    Audiology; 1993; 32(2):89-94. PubMed ID: 8476353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Effects of click duration of the latency of the early evoked response.
    Beattie RC; Boyd R
    J Speech Hear Res; 1984 Mar; 27(1):70-6. PubMed ID: 6717010
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Middle-latency auditory components in response to clicks and low- and middle-frequency tone pips (0.5-1 kHz).
    Maurizi M; Ottaviani F; Paludetti G; Rosignoli M; Almadori G; Tassoni A
    Audiology; 1984; 23(6):569-80. PubMed ID: 6517749
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. The influence of click phase and rate upon latencies and latency distributions of the normal brain-stem auditory evoked potentials.
    Sand T; Sulg I
    Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1984 Jun; 57(6):561-70. PubMed ID: 6202487
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effects of stimulus repetition rate on the auditory brain stem responses (ABR).
    Paludetti G; Maurizi M; Ottaviani F
    Am J Otol; 1983 Jan; 4(3):226-34. PubMed ID: 6829737
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.