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 *

109 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 496720)

  • 1. Cochlear distribution of frequency-following response initiation. A high-pass masking noise study.
    Yamada O; Kodera K; Hink RF; Suzuki JI
    Audiology; 1979; 18(5):381-7. PubMed ID: 496720
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Cochlear initiation site of the frequency-following response: a study of patients with sensorineural hearing loss.
    Yamada O; Kodera K; Hink RF; Yamane H
    Audiology; 1978; 17(6):489-99. PubMed ID: 718538
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Effects of the intensity of masking noise on ear canal recorded low-frequency cochlear microphonic waveforms in normal hearing subjects.
    Zhang M
    Hear Res; 2014 Jul; 313():9-17. PubMed ID: 24793117
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Cochlear initiation sites of the frequency following potential.
    McDermott JC
    Scand Audiol; 1983; 12(2):97-102. PubMed ID: 6612218
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Effects of low-pass noise masking on auditory event-related potentials to speech.
    Martin BA; Stapells DR
    Ear Hear; 2005 Apr; 26(2):195-213. PubMed ID: 15809545
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Derived acoustically evoked brainstem responses by means of narrow-band and notched-noise masking in normal-hearing subjects.
    Thümmler I; Tietze G
    Scand Audiol; 1984; 13(2):129-37. PubMed ID: 6463552
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. High-pass and notch noise masking in suprathreshold brainstem response audiometry.
    Laukli E
    Scand Audiol; 1983; 12(2):109-15. PubMed ID: 6612212
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. The effect of broadband noise on the human brainstem auditory evoked response. II. Frequency specificity.
    Burkard R; Hecox K
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1983 Oct; 74(4):1214-23. PubMed ID: 6643844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Derived brain stem responses by means of pure-tone masking.
    Pantev C; Pantev M
    Scand Audiol; 1982; 11(1):15-22. PubMed ID: 7178798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Analysis of the cochlear microphonic to a low-frequency tone embedded in filtered noise.
    Chertoff ME; Earl BR; Diaz FJ; Sorensen JL
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Nov; 132(5):3351-62. PubMed ID: 23145616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Frequency-following responses in the cat.
    Mair IW; Laukli E
    Hear Res; 1984 Jul; 15(1):1-10. PubMed ID: 6480518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Scalp-recorded frequency-following responses in neonates.
    Gardi J; Salamy A; Mendelson T
    Audiology; 1979; 18(6):494-506. PubMed ID: 526194
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Frequency-dependent fine structure in the frequency-following response: The byproduct of multiple generators.
    Tichko P; Skoe E
    Hear Res; 2017 May; 348():1-15. PubMed ID: 28137699
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effects of decreased audibility produced by high-pass noise masking on cortical event-related potentials to speech sounds/ba/and/da.
    Martin BA; Sigal A; Kurtzberg D; Stapells DR
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1997 Mar; 101(3):1585-99. PubMed ID: 9069627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Origins of the scalp recorded frequency-following response in the cat.
    Gardi J; Merzenich M; McKean C
    Audiology; 1979; 18(5):358-81. PubMed ID: 496719
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Differences between psychoacoustic and frequency following response measures of distortion tone level and masking.
    Gockel HE; Farooq R; Muhammed L; Plack CJ; Carlyon RP
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2012 Oct; 132(4):2524-35. PubMed ID: 23039446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Far-field recorded frequency-following responses: correlates of low pitch auditory perception in humans.
    Marsh JT; Brown WS; Smith JC
    Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol; 1975 Feb; 38(2):113-9. PubMed ID: 45941
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Low-frequency specificity of the auditory brainstem response threshold elicited by clicks masked with 1590-Hz high-pass noise in subjects with sloping cochlear hearing losses.
    Conijn EA; Brocaar MP; van Zanten GA
    Audiology; 1992; 31(5):272-83. PubMed ID: 1449430
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Prolongation of the cochlear microphonic in man. Cochlear microphonic ringing.
    Gibbin KP; Mason SM; Kent SE
    Acta Otolaryngol; 1983; 95(1-2):13-8. PubMed ID: 6829293
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. The amplitude modulation-following response as an audiometric tool.
    Griffiths SK; Chambers RD
    Ear Hear; 1991 Aug; 12(4):235-41. PubMed ID: 1783225
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.