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 *

98 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 3839004)

  • 21. Electrophysiological spread of excitation and pitch perception for dual and single electrodes using the Nucleus Freedom cochlear implant.
    Busby PA; Battmer RD; Pesch J
    Ear Hear; 2008 Dec; 29(6):853-64. PubMed ID: 18633324
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Fusion and lateralization study with two binaural cochlear implant patients.
    Van Hoesel RJ; Clark GM
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep; 166():233-5. PubMed ID: 7668650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Auditory cortical images of cochlear-implant stimuli: coding of stimulus channel and current level.
    Middlebrooks JC; Bierer JA
    J Neurophysiol; 2002 Jan; 87(1):493-507. PubMed ID: 11784765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Loudness summation for pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea: effects of rate, electrode separation, level, and mode of stimulation.
    McKay CM; Remine MD; McDermott HJ
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Sep; 110(3 Pt 1):1514-24. PubMed ID: 11572362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Cochlear Implant Rate Pitch and Melody Perception as a Function of Place and Number of Electrodes.
    Marimuthu V; Swanson BA; Mannell R
    Trends Hear; 2016 Apr; 20():. PubMed ID: 27094028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Prognostic value of round-window psychophysical testing with cochlear-implant candidates.
    Shipp DB; Nedzelski JM
    J Otolaryngol; 1994 Jun; 23(3):172-6. PubMed ID: 8064955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Perceptual dissimilarities among acoustic stimuli and ipsilateral electric stimuli.
    McDermott HJ; Sucher CM
    Hear Res; 2006 Aug; 218(1-2):81-8. PubMed ID: 16777362
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. [Experiences with the implantation of a multichannel electrode in the acoustic nerve].
    Naumann HH; Zwicker E; Scherer H; Seifert J; Leysieffer H; Zollner M
    Laryngol Rhinol Otol (Stuttg); 1986 Mar; 65(3):118-22. PubMed ID: 3754920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Factors affecting auditory performance of postlinguistically deaf adults using cochlear implants.
    Blamey P; Arndt P; Bergeron F; Bredberg G; Brimacombe J; Facer G; Larky J; Lindström B; Nedzelski J; Peterson A; Shipp D; Staller S; Whitford L
    Audiol Neurootol; 1996; 1(5):293-306. PubMed ID: 9390810
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. The contribution of apical stimulation to Mandarin speech perception in users of the MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implant.
    Qi B; Liu B; Krenmayr A; Liu S; Gong S; Liu H; Zhang N; Han D
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2011 Jan; 131(1):52-8. PubMed ID: 20863152
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Electrode discrimination and speech recognition in postlingually deafened adult cochlear implant subjects.
    Zwolan TA; Collins LM; Wakefield GH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1997 Dec; 102(6):3673-85. PubMed ID: 9407659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Qualities of Single Electrode Stimulation as a Function of Rate and Place of Stimulation with a Cochlear Implant.
    Landsberger DM; Vermeire K; Claes A; Van Rompaey V; Van de Heyning P
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):e149-59. PubMed ID: 26583480
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Assessment of Spectral and Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users Using Psychoacoustic Discrimination and Speech Cue Categorization.
    Winn MB; Won JH; Moon IJ
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(6):e377-e390. PubMed ID: 27438871
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Effects of electrode configuration and place of stimulation on speech perception with cochlear prostheses.
    Pfingst BE; Franck KH; Xu L; Bauer EM; Zwolan TA
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2001 Jun; 2(2):87-103. PubMed ID: 11550528
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Psychophysical studies for two multiple-channel cochlear implant patients.
    Tong YC; Clark GM; Blamey PJ; Busby PA; Dowell RC
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1982 Jan; 71(1):153-60. PubMed ID: 6895638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Indication of a relation between speech perception and temporal resolution for cochlear implantees.
    Cazals Y; Pelizzone M; Kasper A; Montandon P
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 1991 Nov; 100(11):893-5. PubMed ID: 1746822
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Melody recognition and musical interval perception by deaf subjects stimulated with electrical pulse trains through single cochlear implant electrodes.
    Pijl S; Schwarz DW
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1995 Aug; 98(2 Pt 1):886-95. PubMed ID: 7642827
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Multi-channel cochlear implant patients with different open speech understanding show some similar basic psychophysical results.
    Cazals Y; Pelizzone M; Kasper A; Montandon P
    Acta Otolaryngol Suppl; 1990; 469():150-5. PubMed ID: 2356721
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. 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]  

  • 40. Pulse rate matching by cochlear implant patients: effects of loudness randomization and electrode position.
    Pijl S
    Ear Hear; 1997 Aug; 18(4):316-25. PubMed ID: 9288477
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.