ライフサイエンスコーパス: otoacoustic

1 e amount of change in the distortion product otoacoustic emission (at 2f(1)-f(2)) just after onset of

2 functionally assessed by distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) analysis.

3 function was evaluated by distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) and auditory brainstem resp

4 cally tuned effect on the distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) and the cochlear whole-nerv

5 Distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) assay and acoustic brainste

6 We used distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measurements to monitor coc

7 Distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) testing was performed on 97

8 as assessed through the contralateral evoked otoacoustic emission (EOAE) amplitude attenuation effect

9 Neonatal hearing test results, including otoacoustic emission (OAE) data, were sought for all neo

10 se -- ABR thresholds, and distortion-product otoacoustic emission -- DPOAE magnitudes), and were clus

11 Distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitudes of Coch(G88E/G88E) mice

12 Tone-evoked distortion product otoacoustic emission and auditory brainstem response mea

13 itory brainstem response, distortion product otoacoustic emission and cochlear microphonics tests, an

14 t with large reduction in distortion product otoacoustic emission and severe hearing loss at high fre

15 However, the fundamental question of how the otoacoustic emission exits the cochlea remains unanswere

16 Electrically evoked otoacoustic emission is a manifestation of reverse trans

17 n auditory threshold, and distortion product otoacoustic emission measurements indicate that this mil

18 hearing screening was performed by means of otoacoustic emission testing and auditory brain stem res

19 and how the inner ear-generated sound, i.e., otoacoustic emission, exits the cochlea, we created a so

20 anical activity in hair cells is spontaneous otoacoustic emission, the unprovoked emanation of sound

21 y, compressive nonlinearity, and spontaneous otoacoustic emission.

22 Click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (CEOAEs) are echo-like waveforms e

23 with the cubic 2f(1)-f(2) distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) at the start of the study

24 Here we used 2f1-f2 distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) measurements to refine the

25 ainstem response (ABR) or distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) or is being challenged by

26 instem response (ABR) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) to assess hearing recovery

27 teral suppression (CS) of distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) in humans and CBA mice.

28 (0.5 to 8 kHz) and evoked distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) were conducted for 32 pat

29 stem responses (ABRs) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) were unaffected by loss o

30 hlear status, assessed by distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), and to further clarify t

31 audiometry, tympanometry, distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), transient otoacoustic em

32 instem response (ABR) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs).

33 outer hair cell function [distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs)].

34 Otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) are faint sounds generated

35 We used otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) as a method to quantify the

36 Furthermore, stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs), sounds emitted by the ea

37 We also observed spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs) in 70% of the homozygous m

38 e pharmacological sensitivity of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs) in a lizard, the Tokay gec

39 mutants show only minimal distortion product otoacoustic emissions and 70-80 dB threshold shifts in a

40 function was assessed via distortion product otoacoustic emissions and auditory brainstem responses (

41 function was assessed via distortion product otoacoustic emissions and auditory brainstem responses,

42 However, previous recordings of otoacoustic emissions and cochlear microphonic potential

43 They lack distortion product otoacoustic emissions and cochlear microphonic responses

44 ddle ear muscle reflexes, distortion product otoacoustic emissions and cochlear microphonics, as well

45 ferent function measures (distortion product otoacoustic emissions and contralateral suppression) wer

46 ms, to evaluate the feasibility of including otoacoustic emissions and extended high frequency audiom

47 in the presence of normal distortion product otoacoustic emissions and normal audiometric thresholds.

48 Since the discovery of otoacoustic emissions and outer hair cell (OHC) motility

49 not involved in the backward propagation of otoacoustic emissions and that sounds exit the cochlea p

50 sed on the measurement of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions and, unlike previous noninvasive p

51 stem evoked responses and distortion product otoacoustic emissions are, for most frequencies, normal

52 oscopy, tympanometry, and distortion product otoacoustic emissions as near the time of admission as w

53 r, the olivocochlear efferents, by examining otoacoustic emissions created by the normal ear, which c

54 se-induced suppression of distortion product otoacoustic emissions derived from outer hair cell trans

55 -frequency audiometry and distortion product otoacoustic emissions for ototoxicity monitoring in chil

56 aneous (SOAE) and stimulus-frequency (SFOAE) otoacoustic emissions from a bird (barn owl, Tyto alba)

57 afness by P25 and reduced distortion product otoacoustic emissions from P15 onward.

58 y brainstem responses and distortion product otoacoustic emissions from these mice displayed wild-typ

59 le the exact mechanism for the production of otoacoustic emissions is not known, active motion of ind

60 Otoacoustic emissions or OAEs (reflections of cochlear e

61 We suggest that otoacoustic emissions originate from phase coherence in

62 and the relatively robust distortion product otoacoustic emissions that are found in elderly subjects

63 The morphology of sensory hair cells and otoacoustic emissions that depend on the integrity of ha

64 surement of auditory brainstem responses and otoacoustic emissions to assess cochlear presynaptic and

65 Otoacoustic emissions were absent in patients with a mod

66 Otoacoustic emissions were not impaired pointing to norm

67 Distortion product otoacoustic emissions were not recordable from Clrn1(-/-

68 rve action potential, and stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions were recorded from 12 days after b

69 ochlear receptor outer hair cell activities (otoacoustic emissions) and absent or abnormally delayed

70 mpound action potentials, distortion product otoacoustic emissions) during efferent fiber activation,

71 r functions (auditory brainstem response and otoacoustic emissions).

72 r microphonic potentials, distortion product otoacoustic emissions, and basilar membrane motion indic

73 ct otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), transient otoacoustic emissions, and the hearing-in-noise test (HI

74 Such sounds, otoacoustic emissions, are widely used for diagnosis of

75 iological tests including distortion product otoacoustic emissions, auditory brainstem responses, env

76 Two possible sources for otoacoustic emissions, both localized within individual

77 es were unrelated to the modest variation in otoacoustic emissions, cochlear tuning, or the residual

78 se thresholds and reduced distortion-product otoacoustic emissions, in the presence of normal endococ

79 roperties, as measured by distortion product otoacoustic emissions, neither before nor after noise ex

80 Otoacoustic emissions, sounds generated by the inner ear

81 Furthermore, otoacoustic emissions, sounds generated inside the cochl

82 e mice, mutant mice showed reduced or absent otoacoustic emissions, suggesting cochlear outer hair ce

83 e mice progressively lost distortion product otoacoustic emissions, suggesting defects in outer hair

84 hearing revealed subtle differences in their otoacoustic emissions, suggesting that the expression of

85 r hair cell function (cochlear microphonics, otoacoustic emissions, summating potentials) and auditor

86 These spontaneous otoacoustic emissions, the most striking manifestation o

87 bly modulated by drugs that affect mammalian otoacoustic emissions, the salicylates and the aminoglyc

88 conduction as well as numerous properties of otoacoustic emissions.

89 earing, sounds that are known as spontaneous otoacoustic emissions.

90 of the sensory input as well as spontaneous otoacoustic emissions.

91 stimulus, the inner ear emits sounds called otoacoustic emissions.

92 y brainstem responses and distortion product otoacoustic emissions.

93 oscillations that might underlie spontaneous otoacoustic emissions.

94 itive, sharply tuned hearing and spontaneous otoacoustic emissions.

95 t of middle-ear immittance, and recording of otoacoustic emissions.

96 oltage, low-mid-frequency distortion-product-otoacoustic-emissions (DPOAEs), and passive basilar memb

97 The otoacoustic measurements indicate that at low sound leve

98 a birth cohort in eastern Slovakia underwent otoacoustic testing at 45 months of age.

99 s were associated with poorer performance on otoacoustic tests at age 45 months.