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
185 related items for PubMed ID: 34028313
1. Effect of Chronological Age on Pulse Rate Discrimination in Adult Cochlear-Implant Users. Johnson KC, Xie Z, Shader MJ, Mayo PG, Goupell MJ. Trends Hear; 2021; 25():23312165211007367. PubMed ID: 34028313 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. 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; 42(5):1358-1372. PubMed ID: 33795616 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Age-Related Changes in Temporal Resolution Revisited: Electrophysiological and Behavioral Findings From Cochlear Implant Users. Mussoi BSS, Brown CJ. Ear Hear; 2019; 40(6):1328-1344. PubMed ID: 31033701 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Impact of Aging and the Electrode-to-Neural Interface on Temporal Processing Ability in Cochlear-Implant Users: Gap Detection Thresholds. Shader MJ, Gordon-Salant S, Goupell MJ. Trends Hear; 2020; 24():2331216520956560. PubMed ID: 32941111 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Impact of Aging and the Electrode-to-Neural Interface on Temporal Processing Ability in Cochlear-Implant Users: Amplitude-Modulation Detection Thresholds. Shader MJ, Gordon-Salant S, Goupell MJ. Trends Hear; 2020; 24():2331216520936160. PubMed ID: 32833587 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Relationship Between Peripheral and Psychophysical Measures of Amplitude Modulation Detection in Cochlear Implant Users. Tejani VD, Abbas PJ, Brown CJ. Ear Hear; 2017; 38(5):e268-e284. PubMed ID: 28207576 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Characteristics of the Adaptation Recovery Function of the Auditory Nerve and Its Association With Advanced Age in Postlingually Deafened Adult Cochlear Implant Users. He S, Skidmore J, Carter BL. Ear Hear; 2017; 43(5):1472-1486. PubMed ID: 35139051 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Effect of stimulus level on the temporal response properties of the auditory nerve in cochlear implants. Hughes ML, Laurello SA. Hear Res; 2017 Aug; 351():116-129. PubMed ID: 28633960 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Variations in carrier pulse rate and the perception of amplitude modulation in cochlear implant users. Green T, Faulkner A, Rosen S. Ear Hear; 2012 Aug; 33(2):221-30. PubMed ID: 22367093 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. 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]
11. Neural Adaptation of the Electrically Stimulated Auditory Nerve Is Not Affected by Advanced Age in Postlingually Deafened, Middle-aged, and Elderly Adult Cochlear Implant Users. He S, Skidmore J, Conroy S, Riggs WJ, Carter BL, Xie R. Ear Hear; 2016 May; 43(4):1228-1244. PubMed ID: 34999595 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Rate pitch discrimination in cochlear implant users with the use of double pulses and different interpulse intervals. Pieper SH, Bahmer A. Cochlear Implants Int; 2019 Nov; 20(6):312-323. PubMed ID: 31448701 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Cortical auditory evoked potentials in cochlear implant listeners via single electrode stimulation in relation to speech perception. Liebscher T, Alberter K, Hoppe U. Int J Audiol; 2018 Dec; 57(12):933-940. PubMed ID: 30295156 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Qualities of Single Electrode Stimulation as a Function of Rate and Place of Stimulation with a Cochlear Implant. Landsberger DM, Vermeire K, Claes A, Van Rompaey V, Van de Heyning P. Ear Hear; 2016 Dec; 37(3):e149-59. PubMed ID: 26583480 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Pulse-rate discrimination deficit in cochlear implant users: is the upper limit of pitch peripheral or central? Zhou N, Mathews J, Dong L. Hear Res; 2019 Jan; 371():1-10. PubMed ID: 30423498 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Electrically evoked auditory steady state responses in cochlear implant users. Hofmann M, Wouters J. J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2010 Jun; 11(2):267-82. PubMed ID: 20033246 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Neurophysiology of cochlear implant users I: effects of stimulus current level and electrode site on the electrical ABR, MLR, and N1-P2 response. Firszt JB, Chambers RD, Kraus And N, Reeder RM. Ear Hear; 2002 Dec; 23(6):502-15. PubMed ID: 12476088 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. The Effect of Aging on the Electrically Evoked Compound Action Potential. Mussoi BS, Brown CJ. Otol Neurotol; 2020 Aug; 41(7):e804-e811. PubMed ID: 32501933 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. The electrically evoked auditory change complex: preliminary results from nucleus cochlear implant users. Brown CJ, Etler C, He S, O'Brien S, Erenberg S, Kim JR, Dhuldhoya AN, Abbas PJ. Ear Hear; 2008 Oct; 29(5):704-17. PubMed ID: 18596644 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Electrically evoked compound action potentials are different depending on the site of cochlear stimulation. van de Heyning P, Arauz SL, Atlas M, Baumgartner WD, Caversaccio M, Chester-Browne R, Estienne P, Gavilan J, Godey B, Gstöttner W, Han D, Hagen R, Kompis M, Kuzovkov V, Lassaletta L, Lefevre F, Li Y, Müller J, Parnes L, Kleine Punte A, Raine C, Rajan G, Rivas A, Rivas JA, Royle N, Sprinzl G, Stephan K, Walkowiak A, Yanov Y, Zimmermann K, Zorowka P, Skarzynski H. Cochlear Implants Int; 2016 Nov; 17(6):251-262. PubMed ID: 27900916 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] Page: [Next] [New Search]