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 *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38986164)

  • 1. Effects of pulse shape on pitch sensitivity of cochlear implant users.
    Arslan NO; Luo X
    Hear Res; 2024 Sep; 450():109075. PubMed ID: 38986164
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Effect of Stimulus Polarity on Detection Thresholds in Cochlear Implant Users: Relationships with Average Threshold, Gap Detection, and Rate Discrimination.
    Carlyon RP; Cosentino S; Deeks JM; Parkinson W; Arenberg JG
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2018 Oct; 19(5):559-567. PubMed ID: 29881937
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Extending the limits of place and temporal pitch perception in cochlear implant users.
    Macherey O; Deeks JM; Carlyon RP
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2011 Apr; 12(2):233-51. PubMed ID: 21116672
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Polarity effects on place pitch and loudness for three cochlear-implant designs and at different cochlear sites.
    Carlyon RP; Deeks JM; Macherey O
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2013 Jul; 134(1):503-9. PubMed ID: 23862825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effect of Pulse Rate and Polarity on the Sensitivity of Auditory Brainstem and Cochlear Implant Users to Electrical Stimulation.
    Carlyon RP; Deeks JM; McKay CM
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2015 Oct; 16(5):653-68. PubMed ID: 26138501
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Electric-acoustic pitch comparisons in single-sided-deaf cochlear implant users: frequency-place functions and rate pitch.
    Schatzer R; Vermeire K; Visser D; Krenmayr A; Kals M; Voormolen M; Van de Heyning P; Zierhofer C
    Hear Res; 2014 Mar; 309():26-35. PubMed ID: 24252455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Characterizing the relationship between modulation sensitivity and pitch resolution in cochlear implant users.
    Camarena A; Goldsworthy RL
    Hear Res; 2024 Jul; 448():109026. PubMed ID: 38776706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Pulse-rate discrimination deficit in cochlear implant users: is the upper limit of pitch peripheral or central?
    Zhou N; Mathews J; Dong L
    Hear Res; 2019 Jan; 371():1-10. PubMed ID: 30423498
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Rate pitch discrimination in cochlear implant users with the use of double pulses and different interpulse intervals.
    Pieper SH; Bahmer A
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2019 Nov; 20(6):312-323. PubMed ID: 31448701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Rate discrimination at low pulse rates in normal-hearing and cochlear implant listeners: Influence of intracochlear stimulation site.
    Stahl P; Macherey O; Meunier S; Roman S
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2016 Apr; 139(4):1578. PubMed ID: 27106306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of electrical pulse polarity shape on intra cochlear neural responses in humans: Triphasic pulses with anodic and cathodic second phase.
    Herrmann DP; Kretzer KVA; Pieper SH; Bahmer A
    Hear Res; 2021 Dec; 412():108375. PubMed ID: 34749281
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of pulse rate on thresholds and loudness of biphasic and alternating monophasic pulse trains in electrical hearing.
    van Wieringen A; Carlyon RP; Macherey O; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2006 Oct; 220(1-2):49-60. PubMed ID: 16904278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Assessing the Relationship Between Pitch Perception and Neural Health in Cochlear Implant Users.
    Arslan NO; Luo X
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2022 Dec; 23(6):875-887. PubMed ID: 36329369
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Dynamic current steering with phantom electrode in cochlear implants.
    Luo X; Garrett C
    Hear Res; 2020 May; 390():107949. PubMed ID: 32200300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Effect of stimulus level on the temporal response properties of the auditory nerve in cochlear implants.
    Hughes ML; Laurello SA
    Hear Res; 2017 Aug; 351():116-129. PubMed ID: 28633960
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Pitch and loudness matching of unmodulated and modulated stimuli in cochlear implantees.
    Vandali A; Sly D; Cowan R; van Hoesel R
    Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 302():32-49. PubMed ID: 23685148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Electric and acoustic harmonic integration predicts speech-in-noise performance in hybrid cochlear implant users.
    Bonnard D; Schwalje A; Gantz B; Choi I
    Hear Res; 2018 Sep; 367():223-230. PubMed ID: 29980380
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Temporal pitch perception at high rates in cochlear implants.
    Kong YY; Carlyon RP
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2010 May; 127(5):3114-23. PubMed ID: 21117760
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Contralateral suppression of human hearing sensitivity in single-sided deaf cochlear implant users.
    Nogueira W; Krüger B; Büchner A; Lopez-Poveda E
    Hear Res; 2019 Mar; 373():121-129. PubMed ID: 29941311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.