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.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Journal Abstract Search

279 related items for PubMed ID: 16450213

  • 1.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Electric-acoustic pitch comparisons in single-sided-deaf cochlear implant users: frequency-place functions and rate pitch.
    Schatzer R, Vermeire K, Visser D, Krenmayr A, Kals M, Voormolen M, Van de Heyning P, Zierhofer C.
    Hear Res; 2014 Mar; 309():26-35. PubMed ID: 24252455
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. An electric frequency-to-place map for a cochlear implant patient with hearing in the nonimplanted ear.
    Dorman MF, Spahr T, Gifford R, Loiselle L, McKarns S, Holden T, Skinner M, Finley C.
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2007 Jun; 8(2):234-40. PubMed ID: 17351713
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Pitch matching psychometrics in electric acoustic stimulation.
    Baumann U, Rader T, Helbig S, Bahmer A.
    Ear Hear; 2011 Jun; 32(5):656-62. PubMed ID: 21869623
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Electro-acoustic stimulation. Acoustic and electric pitch comparisons.
    McDermott H, Sucher C, Simpson A.
    Audiol Neurootol; 2009 Jun; 14 Suppl 1():2-7. PubMed ID: 19390169
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Ipsilateral acoustic electric pitch matching: a case study of cochlear implantation in an up-sloping hearing loss with preserved hearing across multiple frequencies.
    Prentiss S, Staecker H, Wolford B.
    Cochlear Implants Int; 2014 May; 15(3):161-5. PubMed ID: 24601768
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Psychoacoustic and electrophysiological electric-acoustic interaction effects in cochlear implant users with ipsilateral residual hearing.
    Imsiecke M, Büchner A, Lenarz T, Nogueira W.
    Hear Res; 2020 Feb; 386():107873. PubMed ID: 31884220
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. The Relationship Between Insertion Angles, Default Frequency Allocations, and Spiral Ganglion Place Pitch in Cochlear Implants.
    Landsberger DM, Svrakic M, Roland JT, Svirsky M.
    Ear Hear; 2015 Feb; 36(5):e207-13. PubMed ID: 25860624
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 14.