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

108 related items for PubMed ID: 7668603

  • 21. Effects of electrode configuration and stimulus level on rate and level discrimination with cochlear implants.
    Morris DJ, Pfingst BE.
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2000 Nov; 1(3):211-23. PubMed ID: 11545227
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 22. Elimination of facial nerve stimulation by reimplantation in cochlear implant subjects.
    Battmer R, Pesch J, Stöver T, Lesinski-Schiedat A, Lenarz M, Lenarz T.
    Otol Neurotol; 2006 Oct; 27(7):918-22. PubMed ID: 17006341
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 23. Patient performance with the Cochlear Corporation "20 + 2" implant: bipolar versus monopolar activation.
    Zwolan TA, Kileny PR, Ashbaugh C, Telian SA.
    Am J Otol; 1996 Sep; 17(5):717-23. PubMed ID: 8892567
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 24. 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]

  • 25. 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 12; 200(1-2):73-86. PubMed ID: 15668040
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 26. A longitudinal study of electrical stimulation levels and electrode impedance in children using the Clarion cochlear implant.
    Henkin Y, Kaplan-Neeman R, Kronenberg J, Migirov L, Hildesheimer M, Muchnik C.
    Acta Otolaryngol; 2006 Jun 12; 126(6):581-6. PubMed ID: 16720441
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 27. The effect of electrode configuration and duration of deafness on threshold and selectivity of responses to intracochlear electrical stimulation.
    Rebscher SJ, Snyder RL, Leake PA.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 May 12; 109(5 Pt 1):2035-48. PubMed ID: 11386556
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 28. [Spatial tuning curve recording in inferior colliculus during electrical stimulation of the cochlea].
    Pan T, Cao K, Wang Z.
    Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Ke Za Zhi; 1998 Jun 12; 33(3):161-4. PubMed ID: 11717908
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 29. [Experience with electrostimulation of the acoustic nerve before cochlea implantation].
    Hoth S, Lenarz T.
    Laryngorhinootologie; 1991 Apr 12; 70(4):199-207. PubMed ID: 2054026
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 30. Interactions between pulse separation and pulse polarity order in cochlear implants.
    Miller AL, Morris DJ, Pfingst BE.
    Hear Res; 1997 Jul 12; 109(1-2):21-33. PubMed ID: 9259233
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 31. Electrically evoked whole nerve action potentials in Ineraid cochlear implant users: responses to different stimulating electrode configurations and comparison to psychophysical responses.
    Brown CJ, Abbas PJ, Borland J, Bertschy MR.
    J Speech Hear Res; 1996 Jun 12; 39(3):453-67. PubMed ID: 8783126
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 32. Effects of electrical current configuration on potential fields in the electrically stimulated cochlea: field models and measurements.
    Spelman FA, Pfingst BE, Clopton BM, Jolly CN, Rodenhiser KL.
    Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol Suppl; 1995 Sep 12; 166():131-6. PubMed ID: 7668604
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 33. The intensity-pitch relation revisited: monopolar versus bipolar cochlear stimulation.
    Arnoldner C, Riss D, Kaider A, Mair A, Wagenblast J, Baumgartner WD, Gstöttner W, Hamzavi JS.
    Laryngoscope; 2008 Sep 12; 118(9):1630-6. PubMed ID: 18545213
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 34. Comparative psychophysical evaluation in cochlear implantation: electrical and magnetic stimulation.
    Chen J, Hanusaik L, Ramses P, Schipp D, Anderson J, McLean A, Nedzelski J.
    Am J Otol; 1997 Jan 12; 18(1):39-43. PubMed ID: 8989950
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 35. [Determinants of the effectiveness of electric stimulation of the auditory nerve with cochlear implants: II. Configuration of the stimulating electrodes].
    Kral A, Hartmann R, Klinke R.
    Bratisl Lek Listy; 2000 Jan 12; 101(3):170-2. PubMed ID: 10870263
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 36. Behavioral and neurophysiological thresholds for electrical cochlear stimulation in the deaf cat.
    Beitel RE, Vollmer M, Snyder RL, Schreiner CE, Leake PA.
    Audiol Neurootol; 2000 Jan 12; 5(1):31-8. PubMed ID: 10686430
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 37. Effects of pulse separation on detection thresholds for electrical stimulation of the human cochlea.
    Pfingst BE, Holloway LA, Razzaque SA.
    Hear Res; 1996 Sep 01; 98(1-2):77-92. PubMed ID: 8880183
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 38. Loudness summation for pulsatile electrical stimulation of the cochlea: effects of rate, electrode separation, level, and mode of stimulation.
    McKay CM, Remine MD, McDermott HJ.
    J Acoust Soc Am; 2001 Sep 01; 110(3 Pt 1):1514-24. PubMed ID: 11572362
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 39. Across-site variation in detection thresholds and maximum comfortable loudness levels for cochlear implants.
    Pfingst BE, Xu L.
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2004 Mar 01; 5(1):11-24. PubMed ID: 14605920
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 40. Monopolar intracochlear pulse trains selectively activate the inferior colliculus.
    Schoenecker MC, Bonham BH, Stakhovskaya OA, Snyder RL, Leake PA.
    J Assoc Res Otolaryngol; 2012 Oct 01; 13(5):655-72. PubMed ID: 22722899
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

    Page: [Previous] [Next] [New Search]
    of 6.