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: 7789670)

  • 21. Self-Adjustment of Upper Electrical Stimulation Levels in CI Programming and the Effect on Auditory Functioning.
    Vroegop JL; Dingemanse JG; van der Schroeff MP; Metselaar RM; Goedegebure A
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(4):e232-e240. PubMed ID: 28125445
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Auditory Performance and Electrical Stimulation Measures in Cochlear Implant Recipients With Auditory Neuropathy Compared With Severe to Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss.
    Attias J; Greenstein T; Peled M; Ulanovski D; Wohlgelernter J; Raveh E
    Ear Hear; 2017; 38(2):184-193. PubMed ID: 28225734
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. 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]  

  • 24. Relationship between gap detection thresholds and loudness in cochlear-implant users.
    Garadat SN; Pfingst BE
    Hear Res; 2011 May; 275(1-2):130-8. PubMed ID: 21168479
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. The effect of loudness imbalance between electrodes in cochlear implant users.
    Dawson PW; Skok M; Clark GM
    Ear Hear; 1997 Apr; 18(2):156-65. PubMed ID: 9099565
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. Categorical loudness scaling in cochlear implant recipients.
    Busby PA; Au A
    Int J Audiol; 2017 Nov; 56(11):862-869. PubMed ID: 28639840
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Benefit of a commercially available cochlear implant processor with dual-microphone beamforming: a multi-center study.
    Wolfe J; Parkinson A; Schafer EC; Gilden J; Rehwinkel K; Mansanares J; Coughlan E; Wright J; Torres J; Gannaway S
    Otol Neurotol; 2012 Jun; 33(4):553-60. PubMed ID: 22588233
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Loudness ratio production by cochlear implantees using the spectral maxima sound processor.
    McDermott HJ; McKay CM
    Scand Audiol; 1996; 25(2):83-90. PubMed ID: 8738632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Assessing auditory nerve condition by tone decay in deaf subjects with a cochlear implant.
    Wasmann JA; van Eijl RHM; Versnel H; van Zanten GA
    Int J Audiol; 2018 Nov; 57(11):864-871. PubMed ID: 30261773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. 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]  

  • 31. 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]  

  • 32. Implications of deep electrode insertion on cochlear implant fitting.
    Gani M; Valentini G; Sigrist A; Kós MI; Boëx C
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2007 Mar; 8(1):69-83. PubMed ID: 17216585
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Speech perception, localization, and lateralization with bilateral cochlear implants.
    van Hoesel RJ; Tyler RS
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2003 Mar; 113(3):1617-30. PubMed ID: 12656396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. 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]  

  • 35. 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]  

  • 36. Clinical evaluation of higher stimulation rates in the nucleus research platform 8 system.
    Plant K; Holden L; Skinner M; Arcaroli J; Whitford L; Law MA; Nel E
    Ear Hear; 2007 Jun; 28(3):381-93. PubMed ID: 17485987
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. 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]  

  • 38. Threshold and loudness functions for pulsatile stimulation of cochlear implants.
    Shannon RV
    Hear Res; 1985 May; 18(2):135-43. PubMed ID: 3840159
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Bilateral cochlear implants controlled by a single speech processor.
    Lawson DT; Wilson BS; Zerbi M; van den Honert C; Finley CC; Farmer JC; McElveen JT; Roush PA
    Am J Otol; 1998 Nov; 19(6):758-61. PubMed ID: 9831150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. 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]  

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