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

586 related items for PubMed ID: 26994660

  • 1. Auditory steady-state responses in cochlear implant users: Effect of modulation frequency and stimulation artifacts.
    Gransier R, Deprez H, Hofmann M, Moonen M, van Wieringen A, Wouters J.
    Hear Res; 2016 May; 335():149-160. PubMed ID: 26994660
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

  • 3. Improved electrically evoked auditory steady-state response thresholds in humans.
    Hofmann M, Wouters J.
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2012 Aug; 13(4):573-89. PubMed ID: 22569837
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Electrophysiological assessment of temporal envelope processing in cochlear implant users.
    Gransier R, Carlyon RP, Wouters J.
    Sci Rep; 2020 Sep 21; 10(1):15406. PubMed ID: 32958791
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Assessing temporal modulation sensitivity using electrically evoked auditory steady state responses.
    Luke R, Van Deun L, Hofmann M, van Wieringen A, Wouters J.
    Hear Res; 2015 Jun 21; 324():37-45. PubMed ID: 25746913
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Evaluation of an artifact reduction strategy for electrically evoked auditory steady-state responses: Simulations and measurements.
    Bahmer A, Pieper S, Baumann U.
    J Neurosci Methods; 2018 Feb 15; 296():57-68. PubMed ID: 29291927
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Independent component analysis for cochlear implant artifacts attenuation from electrically evoked auditory steady-state response measurements.
    Deprez H, Gransier R, Hofmann M, van Wieringen A, Wouters J, Moonen M.
    J Neural Eng; 2018 Feb 15; 15(1):016006. PubMed ID: 29211684
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Relationship Between Peripheral and Psychophysical Measures of Amplitude Modulation Detection in Cochlear Implant Users.
    Tejani VD, Abbas PJ, Brown CJ.
    Ear Hear; 2017 Feb 15; 38(5):e268-e284. PubMed ID: 28207576
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Template Subtraction to Remove CI Stimulation Artifacts in Auditory Steady-State Responses in CI Subjects.
    Deprez H, Gransier R, Hofmann M, van Wieringen A, Wouters J, Moonen M.
    IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng; 2017 Aug 15; 25(8):1322-1331. PubMed ID: 27810831
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Effects of stimulus manipulation on electrophysiological responses in pediatric cochlear implant users. Part I: duration effects.
    Davids T, Valero J, Papsin BC, Harrison RV, Gordon KA.
    Hear Res; 2008 Oct 15; 244(1-2):7-14. PubMed ID: 18692121
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. Auditory steady-state response evaluation of auditory thresholds in cochlear implant patients.
    Ménard M, Gallego S, Truy E, Berger-Vachon C, Durrant JD, Collet L.
    Int J Audiol; 2004 Dec 15; 43 Suppl 1():S39-43. PubMed ID: 15732381
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Artifact removal by template subtraction enables recordings of the frequency following response in cochlear-implant users.
    Gransier R, Carlyon RP, Richardson ML, Middlebrooks JC, Wouters J.
    Sci Rep; 2024 Mar 14; 14(1):6158. PubMed ID: 38486005
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Cochlear implant artifact attenuation in late auditory evoked potentials: a single channel approach.
    Mc Laughlin M, Lopez Valdes A, Reilly RB, Zeng FG.
    Hear Res; 2013 Aug 14; 302():84-95. PubMed ID: 23727626
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Detection of Electrically Evoked Auditory Steady-State Responses in Cochlear-Implant Recipients With a System Identification Based Method.
    Schott J, Gransier R, Wouters J, Moonen M.
    IEEE Trans Biomed Eng; 2024 Mar 14; 71(3):738-749. PubMed ID: 37725734
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Cortical Auditory Evoked Potentials Recorded From Nucleus Hybrid Cochlear Implant Users.
    Brown CJ, Jeon EK, Chiou LK, Kirby B, Karsten SA, Turner CW, Abbas PJ.
    Ear Hear; 2015 Mar 14; 36(6):723-32. PubMed ID: 26295607
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Effect of stimulus level on the temporal response properties of the auditory nerve in cochlear implants.
    Hughes ML, Laurello SA.
    Hear Res; 2017 Aug 14; 351():116-129. PubMed ID: 28633960
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Source analysis of auditory steady-state responses in acoustic and electric hearing.
    Luke R, De Vos A, Wouters J.
    Neuroimage; 2017 Feb 15; 147():568-576. PubMed ID: 27894891
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Auditory steady state responses and cochlear implants: Modeling the artifact-response mixture in the perspective of denoising.
    Mina F, Attina V, Duroc Y, Veuillet E, Truy E, Thai-Van H.
    PLoS One; 2017 Feb 15; 12(3):e0174462. PubMed ID: 28350887
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Frequency following responses and rate change complexes in cochlear implant users.
    Gransier R, Guérit F, Carlyon RP, Wouters J.
    Hear Res; 2021 May 15; 404():108200. PubMed ID: 33647574
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 20. The Sensitivity of the Electrically Stimulated Auditory Nerve to Amplitude Modulation Cues Declines With Advanced Age.
    Riggs WJ, Vaughan C, Skidmore J, Conroy S, Pellittieri A, Carter BL, Stegman CJ, He S.
    Ear Hear; 2021 May 15; 42(5):1358-1372. PubMed ID: 33795616
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 30.