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 *

123 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8444339)

  • 21. The effect of cochlear hearing loss on auditory brain stem response latency.
    Kirsh I; Thornton A; Burkard R; Halpin C
    Ear Hear; 1992 Aug; 13(4):233-5. PubMed ID: 1397765
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 22. Multiple auditory steady-state responses in children and adults with normal hearing, sensorineural hearing loss, or auditory neuropathy.
    Attias J; Buller N; Rubel Y; Raveh E
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol; 2006 Apr; 115(4):268-76. PubMed ID: 16676823
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 23. Successful cochlear implantation in two profoundly deafened patients with neurofibromatosis type 1: further evidence to support a cochlear site of lesion.
    Vincenti V; Pasanisi E; Guida M; Di Lella F; Giordano D; Bacciu A
    Otol Neurotol; 2015 Apr; 36(4):588-91. PubMed ID: 25356763
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 24. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. I. Correlation of physiological responses with cochlear status.
    Shepherd RK; Javel E
    Hear Res; 1997 Jun; 108(1-2):112-44. PubMed ID: 9213127
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 25. Electrically elicited stapedius reflex in cochlear implant patients.
    Battmer RD; Laszig R; Lehnhardt E
    Ear Hear; 1990 Oct; 11(5):370-4. PubMed ID: 2262087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 26. A cool approach to reducing electrode-induced trauma: Localized therapeutic hypothermia conserves residual hearing in cochlear implantation.
    Tamames I; King C; Bas E; Dietrich WD; Telischi F; Rajguru SM
    Hear Res; 2016 Sep; 339():32-9. PubMed ID: 27260269
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 27. Stapedius reflex evoked in free sound field in cochlear implant users compared to normal-hearing listeners.
    Franke-Trieger A; Mattheus W; Seebacher J; Zahnert T; Neudert M
    Int J Audiol; 2021 Sep; 60(9):695-703. PubMed ID: 33426977
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 28. Longitudinal study of the ecap measured in children with cochlear implants.
    Tanamati LF; Bevilacqua MC; Costa OA
    Braz J Otorhinolaryngol; 2009; 75(1):90-6. PubMed ID: 19488566
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 29. Activity-dependent developmental plasticity of the auditory brain stem in children who use cochlear implants.
    Gordon KA; Papsin BC; Harrison RV
    Ear Hear; 2003 Dec; 24(6):485-500. PubMed ID: 14663348
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 30. Intraoperative recordings of electromyogenic responses from the human stapedius muscle.
    Zarowski A; Fuentes MC; Schaudel D; Leblans M; De Coninck L; Theunen T; Vermeiren A; Verschoren L; van Dinther J; Offeciers EF
    Hear Res; 2021 Sep; 408():108290. PubMed ID: 34233241
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 31. Are auditory steady-state responses a good tool prior to pediatric cochlear implantation?
    Beck RM; Grasel SS; Ramos HF; Almeida ER; Tsuji RK; Bento RF; Brito Rd
    Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2015 Aug; 79(8):1257-62. PubMed ID: 26092547
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 32. Cochlear implantees: Analysis of behavioral and objective measures for a clinical population of various age groups.
    Greisiger R; Shallop JK; Hol PK; Elle OJ; Jablonski GE
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2015; 16 Suppl 4():1-19. PubMed ID: 26642899
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 33. Optimizing fitting in children using objective measures such as neural response imaging and electrically evoked stapedius reflex threshold.
    Caner G; Olgun L; Gültekin G; Balaban M
    Otol Neurotol; 2007 Aug; 28(5):637-40. PubMed ID: 17667772
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 34. Comparing eSRT and eCAP measurements in pediatric MED-EL cochlear implant users.
    Kosaner J; Spitzer P; Bayguzina S; Gultekin M; Behar LA
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2018 May; 19(3):153-161. PubMed ID: 29291688
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 35. Multichannel cochlear implantation with inner ear malformation: case report of performance and management.
    Firszt JB; Reeder RM; Novak MA
    J Am Acad Audiol; 1995 May; 6(3):235-42. PubMed ID: 7620201
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 36. A comparison of round-window and transtympanic promontory electric stimulation in cochlear implant candidates.
    Kileny PR; Zwolan TA; Zimmerman-Phillips S; Kemink JL
    Ear Hear; 1992 Oct; 13(5):294-9. PubMed ID: 1487088
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 37. Electromyographical recording of the electrically elicited stapedius reflex via a bipolar hook electrode.
    Pau HW; Zehlicke T; Sievert U; Schaudel D; Behrend D; Dahl R
    Otol Neurotol; 2009 Jan; 30(1):1-6. PubMed ID: 18833019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 38. [Cochlear microphonic potentials with surface electrodes in the diagnosis of sensorineural hearing loss].
    De los Santos G; Sanjuán J; Gavilán J
    Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp; 1999; 50(5):359-65. PubMed ID: 10491471
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 39. Some comparisons between auditory brain stem response thresholds, latencies, and the pure-tone audiogram.
    Gorga MP; Worthington DW; Reiland JK; Beauchaine KA; Goldgar DE
    Ear Hear; 1985; 6(2):105-12. PubMed ID: 3996784
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 40. Electrically evoked middle-latency auditory potentials in cochlear implant candidates.
    Kileny PR; Kemink JL
    Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg; 1987 Oct; 113(10):1072-7. PubMed ID: 3620128
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.