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 *

89 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 9604345)

  • 1. Within-channel gap detection using dissimilar markers in cochlear implant listeners.
    Chatterjee M; Fu QJ; Shannon RV
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 May; 103(5 Pt 1):2515-9. PubMed ID: 9604345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. Comparisons between detection threshold and loudness perception for individual cochlear implant channels.
    Bierer JA; Nye AD
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(6):641-51. PubMed ID: 25036146
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Unilateral cochlear implant use promotes normal-like loudness perception in adolescents with childhood deafness.
    Steel MM; Abbasalipour P; Salloum CA; Hasek D; Papsin BC; Gordon KA
    Ear Hear; 2014; 35(6):e291-301. PubMed ID: 25072236
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Loudness perception and late auditory evoked potentials in adult cochlear implant users.
    Hoppe U; Rosanowski F; Iro H; Eysholdt U
    Scand Audiol; 2001; 30(2):119-25. PubMed ID: 11409789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Effects of amplitude compression on first- and second-order modulation detection thresholds in cochlear implant listeners.
    Lorenzi C; Sibellas J; Füllgrabe C; Gallégo S; Fugain C; Meyer B
    Int J Audiol; 2004 May; 43(5):264-70. PubMed ID: 15357409
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Effects of phase duration and pulse rate on loudness and pitch percepts in the first auditory midbrain implant patients: Comparison to cochlear implant and auditory brainstem implant results.
    Lim HH; Lenarz T; Joseph G; Battmer RD; Patrick JF; Lenarz M
    Neuroscience; 2008 Jun; 154(1):370-80. PubMed ID: 18384971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. Gap detection in single- and multiple-channel stimuli by LAURA cochlear implantees.
    van Wieringen A; Wouters J
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1999 Oct; 106(4 Pt 1):1925-39. PubMed ID: 10530017
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. Modeling the relationship between psychophysical perception and electrically evoked compound action potential threshold in young cochlear implant recipients: clinical implications for implant fitting.
    Thai-Van H; Truy E; Charasse B; Boutitie F; Chanal JM; Cochard N; Piron JP; Ribas S; Deguine O; Fraysse B; Mondain M; Uziel A; Collet L
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2004 Dec; 115(12):2811-24. PubMed ID: 15546789
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Modulation detection interference in cochlear implant subjects.
    Richardson LM; Busby PA; Clark GM
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 Jul; 104(1):442-52. PubMed ID: 9670536
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Gap detection for similar and dissimilar gap markers.
    Grose JH; Hall JW; Buss E; Hatch D
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Apr; 109(4):1587-95. PubMed ID: 11325129
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Electrical cochlear stimulation in the deaf cat: comparisons between psychophysical and central auditory neuronal thresholds.
    Beitel RE; Snyder RL; Schreiner CE; Raggio MW; Leake PA
    J Neurophysiol; 2000 Apr; 83(4):2145-62. PubMed ID: 10758124
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Effects of phase duration and electrode separation on loudness growth in cochlear implant listeners.
    Chatterjee M; Fu QJ; Shannon RV
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2000 Mar; 107(3):1637-44. PubMed ID: 10738817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effect of Gaussian noise on the threshold, dynamic range, and loudness of analogue cochlear implant stimuli.
    Morse RP; Morse PF; Nunn TB; Archer KA; Boyle P
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2007 Mar; 8(1):42-53. PubMed ID: 17160638
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The relation between gap detection, loudness, and loudness growth in noise-masked normal-hearing listeners.
    Hall JW; Grose JH
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1997 Feb; 101(2):1044-9. PubMed ID: 9035396
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Pitch and loudness matching of unmodulated and modulated stimuli in cochlear implantees.
    Vandali A; Sly D; Cowan R; van Hoesel R
    Hear Res; 2013 Aug; 302():32-49. PubMed ID: 23685148
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Gap detection as a measure of electrode interaction in cochlear implants.
    Hanekom JJ; Shannon RV
    J Acoust Soc Am; 1998 Oct; 104(4):2372-84. PubMed ID: 10491701
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Effects of pulse rate on thresholds and loudness of biphasic and alternating monophasic pulse trains in electrical hearing.
    van Wieringen A; Carlyon RP; Macherey O; Wouters J
    Hear Res; 2006 Oct; 220(1-2):49-60. PubMed ID: 16904278
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 5.