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 *

77 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7674659)

  • 1. Comparison of procedures for obtaining thresholds and maximum acceptable loudness levels with the nucleus cochlear implant system.
    Skinner MW; Holden LK; Holden TA; Demorest ME
    J Speech Hear Res; 1995 Jun; 38(3):677-89. PubMed ID: 7674659
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Relation between neural response telemetry thresholds, T- and C-levels, and loudness judgments in 12 adult nucleus 24 cochlear implant recipients.
    Potts LG; Skinner MW; Gotter BD; Strube MJ; Brenner CA
    Ear Hear; 2007 Aug; 28(4):495-511. PubMed ID: 17609612
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Use of test-retest measures to evaluate performance stability in adults with cochlear implants.
    Skinner MW; Holden LK; Demorest ME; Holden TA
    Ear Hear; 1995 Apr; 16(2):187-97. PubMed ID: 7789670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Modulation frequency discrimination with single and multiple channels in cochlear implant users.
    Galvin JJ; Oba S; Başkent D; Fu QJ
    Hear Res; 2015 Jun; 324():7-18. PubMed ID: 25746914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparisons between neural response imaging thresholds, electrically evoked auditory reflex thresholds and most comfortable loudness levels in CII bionic ear users with HiResolution sound processing strategies.
    Han DM; Chen XQ; Zhao XT; Kong Y; Li YX; Liu S; Liu B; Mo LY
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2005 Jul; 125(7):732-5. PubMed ID: 16012035
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effect of stimulation rate on cochlear implant recipients' thresholds and maximum acceptable loudness levels.
    Skinner MW; Holden LK; Holden TA; Demorest ME
    J Am Acad Audiol; 2000 Apr; 11(4):203-13. PubMed ID: 10783923
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Programming the cochlear implant based on electrical acoustic reflex thresholds: patient performance.
    Spivak LG; Chute PM; Popp AL; Parisier SC
    Laryngoscope; 1994 Oct; 104(10):1225-30. PubMed ID: 7934592
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Effects of presentation level on phoneme and sentence recognition in quiet by cochlear implant listeners.
    Donaldson GS; Allen SL
    Ear Hear; 2003 Oct; 24(5):392-405. PubMed ID: 14534410
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effects of programming threshold and maplaw settings on acoustic thresholds and speech discrimination with the MED-EL COMBI 40+ cochlear implant.
    Boyd PJ
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):608-18. PubMed ID: 17086073
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effect of speech processor program modifications on cochlear implant recipients' threshold and maximum acceptable loudness levels.
    Sun JC; Skinner MW; Liu SY; Huang TS
    Am J Audiol; 1999 Dec; 8(2):128-36. PubMed ID: 10646196
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Intensity discrimination and increment detection in cochlear-implant users.
    Wojtczak M; Donaldson GS; Viemeister NF
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Jul; 114(1):396-407. PubMed ID: 12880051
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Evoked stapedius reflex and compound action potential thresholds versus most comfortable loudness level: assessment of their relation for charge-based fitting strategies in implant users.
    Walkowiak A; Lorens A; Polak M; Kostek B; Skarzynski H; Szkielkowska A; Skarzynski PH
    ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec; 2011; 73(4):189-95. PubMed ID: 21659787
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Using evoked compound action potentials to assess activation of electrodes and predict C-levels in the Tempo+ cochlear implant speech processor.
    Alvarez I; de la Torre A; Sainz M; Roldán C; Schoesser H; Spitzer P
    Ear Hear; 2010 Feb; 31(1):134-45. PubMed ID: 19838116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. 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]  

  • 15. Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants.
    Pfingst BE; Xu L
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2004 Mar; 5(1):11-24. PubMed ID: 14605920
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A method for determining precise electrical hearing thresholds in cochlear implant users.
    Rader T; Doms P; Adel Y; Weissgerber T; Strieth S; Baumann U
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Jul; 57(7):502-509. PubMed ID: 29390897
    [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. Effects of Threshold Adjustment on Speech Perception in Nucleus Cochlear Implant Recipients.
    Busby PA; Arora K
    Ear Hear; 2016; 37(3):303-11. PubMed ID: 26671316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Speech perception in nucleus CI24M cochlear implant users with processor settings based on electrically evoked compound action potential thresholds.
    Smoorenburg GF; Willeboer C; van Dijk JE
    Audiol Neurootol; 2002; 7(6):335-47. PubMed ID: 12401965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effect of inter-phase gap on the sensitivity of cochlear implant users to electrical stimulation.
    Carlyon RP; van Wieringen A; Deeks JM; Long CJ; Lyzenga J; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2005 Jul; 205(1-2):210-24. PubMed ID: 15953530
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.