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

548 related items for PubMed ID: 19617837

  • 1. Excitation patterns of simultaneous and sequential dual-electrode stimulation in cochlear implant recipients.
    Saoji AA, Litvak LM, Hughes ML.
    Ear Hear; 2009 Oct; 30(5):559-67. PubMed ID: 19617837
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Electrophysiological spread of excitation and pitch perception for dual and single electrodes using the Nucleus Freedom cochlear implant.
    Busby PA, Battmer RD, Pesch J.
    Ear Hear; 2008 Dec; 29(6):853-64. PubMed ID: 18633324
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Spread of excitation and channel interaction in single- and dual-electrode cochlear implant stimulation.
    Snel-Bongers J, Briaire JJ, Vanpoucke FJ, Frijns JH.
    Ear Hear; 2012 Dec; 33(3):367-76. PubMed ID: 22048258
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Psychophysical assessment of spatial spread of excitation in electrical hearing with single and dual electrode contact maskers.
    Dingemanse JG, Frijns JH, Briaire JJ.
    Ear Hear; 2006 Dec; 27(6):645-57. PubMed ID: 17086076
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Using current steering to increase spectral resolution in CII and HiRes 90K users.
    Koch DB, Downing M, Osberger MJ, Litvak L.
    Ear Hear; 2007 Apr; 28(2 Suppl):38S-41S. PubMed ID: 17496643
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Simultaneous and non-simultaneous dual electrode stimulation in cochlear implants: evidence for two neural response modalities.
    Frijns JH, Kalkman RK, Vanpoucke FJ, Bongers JS, Briaire JJ.
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2009 Apr; 129(4):433-9. PubMed ID: 19117170
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Electrode interaction in cochlear implant recipients: comparison of straight and contour electrode arrays.
    Xi X, Ji F, Han D, Hong M, Chen A.
    ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec; 2009 Apr; 71(4):228-37. PubMed ID: 19707042
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Auditory brainstem activity and development evoked by apical versus basal cochlear implant electrode stimulation in children.
    Gordon KA, Papsin BC, Harrison RV.
    Clin Neurophysiol; 2007 Aug; 118(8):1671-84. PubMed ID: 17588811
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Effect of peri-modiolar cochlear implant positioning on auditory nerve responses: a neural response telemetry study.
    van Weert S, Stokroos RJ, Rikers MM, van Dijk P.
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2005 Jul; 125(7):725-31. PubMed ID: 16012034
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. 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
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Influence of widening electrode separation on current steering performance.
    Snel-Bongers J, Briaire JJ, Vanpoucke FJ, Frijns JH.
    Ear Hear; 2011 Feb; 32(2):221-9. PubMed ID: 21063206
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 14. Electrophysiologic effects of placing cochlear implant electrodes in a perimodiolar position in young children.
    Wackym PA, Firszt JB, Gaggl W, Runge-Samuelson CL, Reeder RM, Raulie JC.
    Laryngoscope; 2004 Jan; 114(1):71-6. PubMed ID: 14709998
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 16. Electrically evoked compound action potential measures for virtual channels versus physical electrodes.
    Hughes ML, Goulson AM.
    Ear Hear; 2011 Jan; 32(3):323-30. PubMed ID: 21187752
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Use of "phantom electrode" technique to extend the range of pitches available through a cochlear implant.
    Saoji AA, Litvak LM.
    Ear Hear; 2010 Oct; 31(5):693-701. PubMed ID: 20467321
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Practical model description of peripheral neural excitation in cochlear implant recipients: 1. Growth of loudness and ECAP amplitude with current.
    Cohen LT.
    Hear Res; 2009 Jan; 247(2):87-99. PubMed ID: 19063956
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Relation between neural response telemetry thresholds, T- and C-levels, and loudness judgments in 12 adult nucleus 24 cochlear implant recipients.
    Potts LG, Skinner MW, Gotter BD, Strube MJ, Brenner CA.
    Ear Hear; 2007 Aug; 28(4):495-511. PubMed ID: 17609612
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 28.