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 *

153 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 7737916)

  • 21. Correlation between electrical auditory brainstem response and perceptual thresholds in Digisonic cochlear implant users.
    Truy E; Gallego S; Chanal JM; Collet L; Morgon A
    Laryngoscope; 1998 Apr; 108(4 Pt 1):554-9. PubMed ID: 9546269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Electrophysiologic effects of placing cochlear implant electrodes in a perimodiolar position in young children.
    Wackym PA; Firszt JB; Gaggl W; Runge-Samuelson CL; Reeder RM; Raulie JC
    Laryngoscope; 2004 Jan; 114(1):71-6. PubMed ID: 14709998
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. [The effect of high-rate electrical stimulation on excitability of auditory nerve in Guinea pigs].
    Liu A; Wang Z; Cui Y; Zhou L; Chi F
    Lin Chuang Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi; 2005 May; 19(10):454-6, 460. PubMed ID: 16108323
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Chronic intracochlear electrical stimulation in the neonatally deafened cat. I: Expansion of central representation.
    Snyder RL; Rebscher SJ; Cao KL; Leake PA; Kelly K
    Hear Res; 1990 Dec; 50(1-2):7-33. PubMed ID: 2076984
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Characteristics of electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses in patients with cochlear nerve canal stenosis receiving cochlear implants.
    Wang Z; Liu Y; Wang L; Shen X; Han S; Wang W; Gao F; Liang W; Peng KA
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2018 Jan; 104():98-103. PubMed ID: 29287891
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. A Cochlear Implant Performance Prognostic Test Based on Electrical Field Interactions Evaluated by eABR (Electrical Auditory Brainstem Responses).
    Guevara N; Hoen M; Truy E; Gallego S
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(5):e0155008. PubMed ID: 27149268
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Usefulness of Electrical Auditory Brainstem Responses to Assess the Functionality of the Cochlear Nerve Using an Intracochlear Test Electrode.
    Lassaletta L; Polak M; Huesers J; Díaz-Gómez M; Calvino M; Varela-Nieto I; Gavilán J
    Otol Neurotol; 2017 Dec; 38(10):e413-e420. PubMed ID: 29076926
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Cochlear implant electrode configuration effects on activation threshold and tonotopic selectivity.
    Snyder RL; Middlebrooks JC; Bonham BH
    Hear Res; 2008 Jan; 235(1-2):23-38. PubMed ID: 18037252
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Cochlear nerve stimulation with a 3-dimensional penetrating electrode array.
    Hillman T; Badi AN; Normann RA; Kertesz T; Shelton C
    Otol Neurotol; 2003 Sep; 24(5):764-8. PubMed ID: 14501454
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Electrically evoked auditory brain stem responses for lateral and medial placement of the Clarion HiFocus electrode.
    Firszt JB; Wackym PA; Gaggl W; Burg LS; Reeder RM
    Ear Hear; 2003 Apr; 24(2):184-90. PubMed ID: 12677114
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Measurements of threshold shifts observed when using normal and preformed electrodes.
    Reuter G; Cords SM; Issing P; Lenarz T
    Am J Otol; 1997 Nov; 18(6 Suppl):S26. PubMed ID: 9391585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Histological and physiological effects of the central auditory prosthesis: surface versus penetrating electrodes.
    Liu X; McPhee G; Seldon HL; Clark GM
    Hear Res; 1997 Dec; 114(1-2):264-74. PubMed ID: 9447940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. Electrical field interactions in different cochlear implant systems.
    Boëx C; de Balthasar C; Kós MI; Pelizzone M
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Oct; 114(4 Pt 1):2049-57. PubMed ID: 14587604
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. Temporal integration of short-duration pulse trains in cochlear implant listeners: Psychophysical and electrophysiological measurements.
    Macherey O; Stahl P; Intartaglia B; Meunier S; Roman S; Schön D
    Hear Res; 2021 Apr; 403():108176. PubMed ID: 33524792
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Effects of stimulus manipulation on electrophysiological responses in pediatric cochlear implant users. Part I: duration effects.
    Davids T; Valero J; Papsin BC; Harrison RV; Gordon KA
    Hear Res; 2008 Oct; 244(1-2):7-14. PubMed ID: 18692121
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. Quantitative analysis of electrically evoked auditory brainstem responses in implanted children with auditory neuropathy/dyssynchrony.
    Runge-Samuelson CL; Drake S; Wackym PA
    Otol Neurotol; 2008 Feb; 29(2):174-8. PubMed ID: 18025997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. The relationship between electrical auditory brainstem responses and perceptual thresholds in Digisonic® SP cochlear implant users.
    Guenser G; Laudanski J; Phillipon B; Backus BC; Bordure P; Romanet P; Parietti-Winkler C
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2015 Jan; 16(1):32-8. PubMed ID: 24855994
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Postoperative objective detecting techniques for cochlear implant children with inner ear malformation.
    Qiao XF; Li X; Zhang QW; Li TL; Wang D
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2017 Nov; 102():1-6. PubMed ID: 29106852
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.