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

147 related items for PubMed ID: 8234752

  • 1. Quantitative comparison of electrically and acoustically evoked auditory perception: implications for the location of perceptual mechanisms.
    Shannon RV.
    Prog Brain Res; 1993; 97():261-9. PubMed ID: 8234752
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 2. Psychophysical measures from electrical stimulation of the human cochlear nucleus.
    Shannon RV, Otto SR.
    Hear Res; 1990 Aug 01; 47(1-2):159-68. PubMed ID: 2228792
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 3. Electrical cochlear stimulation in the deaf cat: comparisons between psychophysical and central auditory neuronal thresholds.
    Beitel RE, Snyder RL, Schreiner CE, Raggio MW, Leake PA.
    J Neurophysiol; 2000 Apr 01; 83(4):2145-62. PubMed ID: 10758124
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 4. Fos-like immunoreactivity in the auditory brainstem evoked by bipolar intracochlear electrical stimulation: effects of current level and pulse duration.
    Saito H, Miller JM, Pfingst BE, Altschuler RA.
    Neuroscience; 1999 Apr 01; 91(1):139-61. PubMed ID: 10336066
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 5. Pure-Tone Masking Patterns for Monopolar and Phantom Electrical Stimulation in Cochlear Implants.
    Saoji AA, Koka K, Litvak LM, Finley CC.
    Ear Hear; 2018 Apr 01; 39(1):124-130. PubMed ID: 28700446
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 6. Cochlear, brainstem, and psychophysical responses show spectrotemporal tradeoff in human auditory processing.
    Bidelman GM, Bhagat SP.
    Neuroreport; 2017 Jan 01; 28(1):17-22. PubMed ID: 27893606
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 7. Electric-acoustic forward masking in cochlear implant users with ipsilateral residual hearing.
    Imsiecke M, Krüger B, Büchner A, Lenarz T, Nogueira W.
    Hear Res; 2018 Jul 01; 364():25-37. PubMed ID: 29673567
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 8. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve. I. Correlation of physiological responses with cochlear status.
    Shepherd RK, Javel E.
    Hear Res; 1997 Jun 01; 108(1-2):112-44. PubMed ID: 9213127
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 9. Recovery from forward masking in elderly cochlear implant users.
    Lee ER, Friedland DR, Runge CL.
    Otol Neurotol; 2012 Apr 01; 33(3):355-63. PubMed ID: 22410729
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 10. Electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve: the coding of frequency, the perception of pitch and the development of cochlear implant speech processing strategies for profoundly deaf people.
    Clark GM.
    Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol; 1996 Sep 01; 23(9):766-76. PubMed ID: 8911712
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 11. A physiologically-inspired model reproducing the speech intelligibility benefit in cochlear implant listeners with residual acoustic hearing.
    Zamaninezhad L, Hohmann V, Büchner A, Schädler MR, Jürgens T.
    Hear Res; 2017 Feb 01; 344():50-61. PubMed ID: 27838372
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 12. Auditory cortex phase locking to amplitude-modulated cochlear implant pulse trains.
    Middlebrooks JC.
    J Neurophysiol; 2008 Jul 01; 100(1):76-91. PubMed ID: 18367697
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 13. Chronic electrical stimulation of the auditory nerve at high stimulus rates: a physiological and histopathological study.
    Xu J, Shepherd RK, Millard RE, Clark GM.
    Hear Res; 1997 Mar 01; 105(1-2):1-29. PubMed ID: 9083801
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 14. Assessment of Spectral and Temporal Resolution in Cochlear Implant Users Using Psychoacoustic Discrimination and Speech Cue Categorization.
    Winn MB, Won JH, Moon IJ.
    Ear Hear; 2016 Mar 01; 37(6):e377-e390. PubMed ID: 27438871
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 15. Masking release with changing fundamental frequency: Electric acoustic stimulation resembles normal hearing subjects.
    Auinger AB, Riss D, Liepins R, Rader T, Keck T, Keintzel T, Kaider A, Baumgartner WD, Gstoettner W, Arnoldner C.
    Hear Res; 2017 Jul 01; 350():226-234. PubMed ID: 28527538
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 16. Mode-locking neurodynamics predict human auditory brainstem responses to musical intervals.
    Lerud KD, Almonte FV, Kim JC, Large EW.
    Hear Res; 2014 Feb 01; 308():41-9. PubMed ID: 24091182
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 17. Auditory temporal acuity probed with cochlear implant stimulation and cortical recording.
    Kirby AE, Middlebrooks JC.
    J Neurophysiol; 2010 Jan 01; 103(1):531-42. PubMed ID: 19923242
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 18. Interaural stimulation timing in single sided deaf cochlear implant users.
    Zirn S, Arndt S, Aschendorff A, Wesarg T.
    Hear Res; 2015 Oct 01; 328():148-56. PubMed ID: 26302945
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

  • 19. Comodulation masking release induced by controlled electrical stimulation of auditory nerve fibers.
    Zirn S, Hempel JM, Schuster M, Hemmert W.
    Hear Res; 2013 Feb 01; 296():60-6. PubMed ID: 23220120
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]

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

    Page: [Next] [New Search]
    of 8.