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.
7. Recovery from forward masking in cochlear implant listeners depends on stimulation mode, level, and electrode location. Chatterjee M; Kulkarni AM J Acoust Soc Am; 2017 May; 141(5):3190. PubMed ID: 28682084 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Recovery from forward masking in elderly cochlear implant users. Lee ER; Friedland DR; Runge CL Otol Neurotol; 2012 Apr; 33(3):355-63. PubMed ID: 22410729 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. The Estimated Electrode-Neuron Interface in Cochlear Implant Listeners Is Different for Early-Implanted Children and Late-Implanted Adults. DiNino M; O'Brien G; Bierer SM; Jahn KN; Arenberg JG J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2019 Jun; 20(3):291-303. PubMed ID: 30911952 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Modulation detection interference in cochlear implant listeners under forward masking conditions. Chatterjee M; Kulkarni AM J Acoust Soc Am; 2018 Feb; 143(2):1117. PubMed ID: 29495705 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Psychophysical Tuning Curves as a Correlate of Electrode Position in Cochlear Implant Listeners. DeVries L; Arenberg JG J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2018 Oct; 19(5):571-587. PubMed ID: 29869047 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Central Auditory Processing of Temporal and Spectral-Variance Cues in Cochlear Implant Listeners. Pham CQ; Bremen P; Shen W; Yang SM; Middlebrooks JC; Zeng FG; Mc Laughlin M PLoS One; 2015; 10(7):e0132423. PubMed ID: 26176553 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Impact of Aging and the Electrode-to-Neural Interface on Temporal Processing Ability in Cochlear-Implant Users: Amplitude-Modulation Detection Thresholds. Shader MJ; Gordon-Salant S; Goupell MJ Trends Hear; 2020; 24():2331216520936160. PubMed ID: 32833587 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Assessing the relationship between neural health measures and speech performance with simultaneous electric stimulation in cochlear implant listeners. Langner F; Arenberg JG; Büchner A; Nogueira W PLoS One; 2021; 16(12):e0261295. PubMed ID: 34898654 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Psychophysical measures from electrical stimulation of the human cochlear nucleus. Shannon RV; Otto SR Hear Res; 1990 Aug; 47(1-2):159-68. PubMed ID: 2228792 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Pure-Tone Masking Patterns for Monopolar and Phantom Electrical Stimulation in Cochlear Implants. Saoji AA; Koka K; Litvak LM; Finley CC Ear Hear; 2018; 39(1):124-130. PubMed ID: 28700446 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Auditory Enhancement in Cochlear-Implant Users Under Simultaneous and Forward Masking. Kreft HA; Oxenham AJ J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2017 Jun; 18(3):483-493. PubMed ID: 28303412 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Evaluating multipulse integration as a neural-health correlate in human cochlear-implant users: Relationship to forward-masking recovery. Zhou N; Pfingst BE J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Mar; 139(3):EL70-5. PubMed ID: 27036290 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Auditory Detection Thresholds and Cochlear Resistivity Differ Between Pediatric Cochlear Implant Listeners With Enlarged Vestibular Aqueduct and Those With Connexin-26 Mutations. Jahn KN; Bergan MD; Arenberg JG Am J Audiol; 2020 Mar; 29(1):23-34. PubMed ID: 31934787 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]