戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 r functions (auditory brainstem response and otoacoustic emissions).
2 g, compressive nonlinearity, and spontaneous otoacoustic emission.
3 y, compressive nonlinearity, and spontaneous otoacoustic emission.
4 the recovery of odd-order distortion product otoacoustic emissions.
5 itive, sharply tuned hearing and spontaneous otoacoustic emissions.
6 t of middle-ear immittance, and recording of otoacoustic emissions.
7 athways compared with previous studies using otoacoustic emissions.
8 s recordings of ear canal distortion product otoacoustic emissions.
9 conduction as well as numerous properties of otoacoustic emissions.
10 earing, sounds that are known as spontaneous otoacoustic emissions.
11  of the sensory input as well as spontaneous otoacoustic emissions.
12  stimulus, the inner ear emits sounds called otoacoustic emissions.
13 y brainstem responses and distortion product otoacoustic emissions.
14 oscillations that might underlie spontaneous otoacoustic emissions.
15 sholds (0.25-16 kHz), and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (1-16 kHz) were utilized for the r
16                           Distortion product otoacoustic emission amplitudes of Coch(G88E/G88E) mice
17               Tone-evoked distortion product otoacoustic emission and auditory brainstem response mea
18 itory brainstem response, distortion product otoacoustic emission and cochlear microphonics tests, an
19 t with large reduction in distortion product otoacoustic emission and severe hearing loss at high fre
20 mutants show only minimal distortion product otoacoustic emissions and 70-80 dB threshold shifts in a
21 function was assessed via distortion product otoacoustic emissions and auditory brainstem responses (
22 function was assessed via distortion product otoacoustic emissions and auditory brainstem responses,
23 function was assessed via distortion product otoacoustic emissions and auditory brainstem responses.
24              However, previous recordings of otoacoustic emissions and cochlear microphonic potential
25                 They lack distortion product otoacoustic emissions and cochlear microphonic responses
26 ddle ear muscle reflexes, distortion product otoacoustic emissions and cochlear microphonics, as well
27 ferent function measures (distortion product otoacoustic emissions and contralateral suppression) wer
28 ms, to evaluate the feasibility of including otoacoustic emissions and extended high frequency audiom
29                        Distortion product of otoacoustic emissions and immunohistochemistry in the ra
30 in the presence of normal distortion product otoacoustic emissions and normal audiometric thresholds.
31                       Since the discovery of otoacoustic emissions and outer hair cell (OHC) motility
32  not involved in the backward propagation of otoacoustic emissions and that sounds exit the cochlea p
33 sed on the measurement of stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions and, unlike previous noninvasive p
34 ochlear receptor outer hair cell activities (otoacoustic emissions) and absent or abnormally delayed
35 r microphonic potentials, distortion product otoacoustic emissions, and basilar membrane motion indic
36 tory brainstem responses, distortion product otoacoustic emissions, and number of hair cell synapses.
37 ct otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), transient otoacoustic emissions, and the hearing-in-noise test (HI
38 ry brainstem response and distortion-product otoacoustic emissions, and was accompanied by cochlear h
39 und by 6-7 months, whilst distortion product otoacoustic emissions are no different to control animal
40 stem evoked responses and distortion product otoacoustic emissions are, for most frequencies, normal
41                                 Such sounds, otoacoustic emissions, are widely used for diagnosis of
42 oscopy, tympanometry, and distortion product otoacoustic emissions as near the time of admission as w
43 e amount of change in the distortion product otoacoustic emission (at 2f(1)-f(2)) just after onset of
44 iological tests including distortion product otoacoustic emissions, auditory brainstem responses, env
45                     Two possible sources for otoacoustic emissions, both localized within individual
46                                 Click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (CEOAEs) are echo-like waveforms e
47 es were unrelated to the modest variation in otoacoustic emissions, cochlear tuning, or the residual
48 r, the olivocochlear efferents, by examining otoacoustic emissions created by the normal ear, which c
49 se-induced suppression of distortion product otoacoustic emissions derived from outer hair cell trans
50  functionally assessed by distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) analysis.
51 function was evaluated by distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) and auditory brainstem resp
52 cally tuned effect on the distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) and the cochlear whole-nerv
53                           Distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) assay and acoustic brainste
54                   We used distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) measurements to monitor coc
55                           Distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) testing was performed on 97
56 ponse (ABR) wave I, lower distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) thresholds, increased cell
57 eption thresholds (SRTs), Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions (DPOAE) amplitudes, Signal to Nois
58 with the cubic 2f(1)-f(2) distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) at the start of the study
59       Here we used 2f1-f2 distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) measurements to refine the
60 ainstem response (ABR) or distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) or is being challenged by
61 instem response (ABR) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) to assess hearing recovery
62 se -- ABR thresholds, and distortion-product otoacoustic emission -- DPOAE magnitudes), and were clus
63 sure were observed in the distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) and the auditory brainste
64 iving with HIV have lower distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) compared with HIV-negativ
65 teral suppression (CS) of distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) in humans and CBA mice.
66 bly reduce EP showed that distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) recovered before EP.
67 (0.5 to 8 kHz) and evoked distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) were conducted for 32 pat
68 stem responses (ABRs) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) were unaffected by loss o
69                           Distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), a readout of active, MET
70 hlear status, assessed by distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), and to further clarify t
71  mice, displayed enhanced distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), suggesting an improved e
72 audiometry, tympanometry, distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), transient otoacoustic em
73 ded pure tone thresholds, distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), tympanometry, and word r
74 table in the ear canal as distortion-product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs).
75 nses (ABRs) and decreased distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs).
76 instem response (ABR) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs).
77 outer hair cell function [distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs)].
78 oltage, low-mid-frequency distortion-product-otoacoustic-emissions (DPOAEs), and passive basilar memb
79 mpound action potentials, distortion product otoacoustic emissions) during efferent fiber activation,
80 as assessed through the contralateral evoked otoacoustic emission (EOAE) amplitude attenuation effect
81 However, the fundamental question of how the otoacoustic emission exits the cochlea remains unanswere
82 and how the inner ear-generated sound, i.e., otoacoustic emission, exits the cochlea, we created a so
83 -frequency audiometry and distortion product otoacoustic emissions for ototoxicity monitoring in chil
84 aneous (SOAE) and stimulus-frequency (SFOAE) otoacoustic emissions from a bird (barn owl, Tyto alba)
85 afness by P25 and reduced distortion product otoacoustic emissions from P15 onward.
86 y brainstem responses and distortion product otoacoustic emissions from these mice displayed wild-typ
87 or tympanometry, acoustic reflex thresholds, otoacoustic emissions, hearing sensitivity, speech recep
88 fails to produce adaptation of MET-dependent otoacoustic emissions in vivo in the Tecta/Tectb(-/-) mi
89 se thresholds and reduced distortion-product otoacoustic emissions, in the presence of normal endococ
90                          Electrically evoked otoacoustic emission is a manifestation of reverse trans
91 le the exact mechanism for the production of otoacoustic emissions is not known, active motion of ind
92 n auditory threshold, and distortion product otoacoustic emission measurements indicate that this mil
93 roperties, as measured by distortion product otoacoustic emissions, neither before nor after noise ex
94     Neonatal hearing test results, including otoacoustic emission (OAE) data, were sought for all neo
95                                              Otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) are faint sounds generated
96                                      We used otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) as a method to quantify the
97                                              Otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) provide information about t
98 on push-pull amplification must contend with otoacoustic emissions (OAEs), whose existence implies th
99 tone audiometry (CPA) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (OAEs).
100 und AN responses by 40-70% without impacting otoacoustic emissions or behavioral tone sensitivity in
101                                              Otoacoustic emissions or OAEs (reflections of cochlear e
102                              We suggest that otoacoustic emissions originate from phase coherence in
103                           Stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) are a potentially powerfu
104                           Stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs) provide a noninvasive alt
105              Furthermore, stimulus-frequency otoacoustic emissions (SFOAEs), sounds emitted by the ea
106                                  Spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs) are weak sounds that emana
107 lf-sustained oscillations called spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs) can often be measured in t
108                 We also observed spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs) in 70% of the homozygous m
109 e pharmacological sensitivity of spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs) in a lizard, the Tokay gec
110                                              Otoacoustic emissions, sounds generated by the inner ear
111                                 Furthermore, otoacoustic emissions, sounds generated inside the cochl
112 e mice, mutant mice showed reduced or absent otoacoustic emissions, suggesting cochlear outer hair ce
113 e mice progressively lost distortion product otoacoustic emissions, suggesting defects in outer hair
114 hearing revealed subtle differences in their otoacoustic emissions, suggesting that the expression of
115 r hair cell function (cochlear microphonics, otoacoustic emissions, summating potentials) and auditor
116 ening was performed using transiently evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) and automated auditory brai
117 ivity can be measured using Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions (TEOAE), which assess the cochlea'
118  hearing screening was performed by means of otoacoustic emission testing and auditory brain stem res
119 and the relatively robust distortion product otoacoustic emissions that are found in elderly subjects
120     The morphology of sensory hair cells and otoacoustic emissions that depend on the integrity of ha
121 anical activity in hair cells is spontaneous otoacoustic emission, the unprovoked emanation of sound
122                            These spontaneous otoacoustic emissions, the most striking manifestation o
123 bly modulated by drugs that affect mammalian otoacoustic emissions, the salicylates and the aminoglyc
124       Real-time shifts in distortion product otoacoustic emission thresholds and amplitudes were meas
125 lity to amplify sound, as distortion product otoacoustic emission thresholds were not affected in age
126 esponse (ABR) thresholds, distortion product otoacoustic emission thresholds, or ABR wave I amplitude
127 surement of auditory brainstem responses and otoacoustic emissions to assess cochlear presynaptic and
128                                              Otoacoustic emissions were absent in patients with a mod
129                           Distortion product otoacoustic emissions were also monitored.
130                                              Otoacoustic emissions were not impaired pointing to norm
131                           Distortion product otoacoustic emissions were not recordable from Clrn1(-/-
132 rve action potential, and stimulus frequency otoacoustic emissions were recorded from 12 days after b

 
Page Top