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

261 related items for PubMed ID: 16904278

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

  • 2.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Effects of waveform shape on human sensitivity to electrical stimulation of the inner ear.
    van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Laneau J, Wouters J.
    Hear Res; 2005 Feb; 200(1-2):73-86. PubMed ID: 15668040
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. 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 12; 154(1):370-80. PubMed ID: 18384971
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. 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 12; 125(7):732-5. PubMed ID: 16012035
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 8. Effects of pulse shape on pitch sensitivity of cochlear implant users.
    Arslan NO, Luo X.
    Hear Res; 2024 Sep 01; 450():109075. PubMed ID: 38986164
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Asymmetric pulses in cochlear implants: effects of pulse shape, polarity, and rate.
    Macherey O, van Wieringen A, Carlyon RP, Deeks JM, Wouters J.
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2006 Sep 01; 7(3):253-66. PubMed ID: 16715356
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Neural response telemetry reconsidered: II. The influence of neural population on the ECAP recovery function and refractoriness.
    Botros A, Psarros C.
    Ear Hear; 2010 Jun 01; 31(3):380-91. PubMed ID: 20090532
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 12.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. 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 01; 27(6):608-18. PubMed ID: 17086073
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 16. Threshold predictions of different pulse shapes using a human auditory nerve fibre model containing persistent sodium and slow potassium currents.
    Smit JE, Hanekom T, van Wieringen A, Wouters J, Hanekom JJ.
    Hear Res; 2010 Oct 01; 269(1-2):12-22. PubMed ID: 20708672
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

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

  • 19. Effects of pulse width, pulse rate and paired electrode stimulation on psychophysical measures of dynamic range and speech recognition in cochlear implants.
    Bonnet RM, Boermans PP, Avenarius OF, Briaire JJ, Frijns JH.
    Ear Hear; 2012 Oct 01; 33(4):489-96. PubMed ID: 22517184
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20.
    ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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