Clinical Evaluation of a Portable Digital Hearing Aid with Narrow-band Loudness Compensation

References

• Arlinger S, Billermark E, Oberg M, Lunner T, Hellgren J. Clinical trial of a digital hearing aid. Scand Audiol 1998; 27: 51–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asano F, Suzuki Y, Sone T, Kakehata S, Satake M, Ohyama K, et al. A digital hearing aid that compensates loudness for sensorineural impaired listeners. Proc ICASSP 1991a; 3625–8.
   Google Scholar
• Asano F, Suzuki Y, Sone T, Kakehata S, Satake M, Ohyama K, et al. A digital hearing aid system that compensates for lack of loudness. Proc ISSHS 1991b; 122–33.
   Google Scholar
• Asano F, Suzuki Y, Sone T, Hayashi T, Satake M, Ohyama K, et al. A method of designing and realizing a digital hearing aid that compensates loudness for impaired listeners (in Japanese). J Acoust Soc Jap 1991c; 47: 373–9.
   Google Scholar
• Biering-Sörensen M, Riess H, Boisen G, Parving A. A clinical comparative investigation of a non-linear versus linear hearing aid. Scand Audiol 1995; 25: 259–62.
   Google Scholar
• Bustamante DK, Braida LD. Multiband compression limiting for hearing-impaired listeners. J Rehab Res Develop 1987; 24: 149–60.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Byrne D, Dillon H. The National Acoustic Laboratories' (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear Hear 1986; 7: 257–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ching T, Dillon H, Byrne D. Implications of intelligibility research for hearing aid fitting. NAL annual report (hearing aid fitting) 1996; 7: 16–7.
   Google Scholar
• Engebretson AM, Morley RE, Popelka GR. Development of an ear-level digital aid and computer-assisted fitting procedure: an interim report. J Rehab Res Develop 1987; 24: 55–64.
   Google Scholar
• Farassopoulos AM, De Righetti FG, Ventura JC. Evaluation of a new multichannel hearing aid for speech enhancement of hearing impaired listeners. Proc 13th ICA 1989; 1: 457–60.
   Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S. The time course and magnitude of perceptual acclimatization to frequency responses: evidence from monaural fitting of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 92: 1258–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasberg BR, Moore BCJ. Auditory filter shapes in subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear impairments. J Acoust Soc Am 1986; 79: 1020–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hellbriick J. Loudness scaling: ratio scales, intersubject variability and some other problems. In: Schick A, Hellbriick J, Weber R, eds. Contributions to psychological acoustics. Results of the Fifth Oldenburg Symposium on Psychological A. BIS Universität Oldenburg, 1991; 119–33.
   Google Scholar
• Heller O. Hörfeldaudiometric mit dem Verfahren der Kategori-enunterteilung (KU). Psychologische Beitrage 1985; 27: 478–93.
   Google Scholar
• Hohmann V, Kollmeier B. Perceptual models for hearing aid algorithms. In: Kollmeier B, ed. Psychoacoustics, speech and hearing aids. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing, 1995; 193–202.
   Google Scholar
• Kiessling J, Schubert M, Archut A. Adaptive fitting of hearing instruments by category loudness scaling (ScalAdapt). Scand Audiol 1996; 25: 153–60.
   Google Scholar
• Killion MC. Talking hair cells: what they have to say about hearing aids. In: Berlin CI, ed. Hair cell and hearing aids. London: Singular Publishing Group 1996; 125–72.
   Google Scholar
• Kodera K, Hiraishi M, Miura M. Effects of co-articulation on speech discrimination scores (in Japanese with English abstract). Audiol Jap 1997; 40: 189–94.
   Google Scholar
• Kodera K, Hiraishi M. Incidence of monosyllables in Japanese conversation (in Japanese with English abstract). Audiol Jap 1998; 41: 73–8.
   Google Scholar
• Kollmeier B. Simulation of digital hearing aids based on loudness scaling and modulation discrimination. In: Schick A, Hellbriik J, Weber R, eds. Contributions to psychological acoustics. Results of the Fifth Oldenberg Symposium on Psychological A. BIS Universität Oldenburg, 1991; 171–86.
   Google Scholar
• Laurence RF, Moore BCJ, Glasberg BR. A comparison of behind-the-ear high-fidelity linear aids and two-channel compression hearing aids in the laboratory and in everyday life. Br J Audiol 1983; 17: 31–48.
   Google Scholar
• Leijon A. Optimization of hearing-aid gain and frequency response for cochlear hearing losses. Ph.D. Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Levitt H. Digital master hearing aids: a tutorial review. J Rehab Res Develop 1987; 24: 7–19.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Levitt H, Newmann A, Mills R, Schwander T. A digital master hearing aid. J Rehab Res Develop 1986; 23: 79–87.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lippmann RP, Braida LD, Durlach NI. Study of multichannel amplitude compression and linear amplification for persons with sensorineural hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 1981; 69: 524–34.
   Google Scholar
• Lunner T, Hellgren J, Arlinger S, Elberling C. A digital filterbank hearing aid: predicting user preference and performance for two signal processing algorithms. Ear Hear 1997; 18: 12–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyberger S. Method of fitting hearing aid. U.S. Patient Applications S.N. 543, 278. July 3, 1944.
   Google Scholar
• McCandless G, Lyregaard P. Prescription of gain/output (POGO) for hearing aids. Hear Instr 1983; 34 (issue): 16–21.
   Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ. Design and evaluation of a two-channel compres-sion hearing aid. J Rehab Res Develop 1987; 24: 181–92.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore BCJ. An introduction to the psychology of hearing, 3rd ed. London. Academic Press, 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ. Characterization and simulation of impaired hearing: implications for Hearing Aid Design. Ear Hear 1991; 12 (Suppl): 154S–61S.
   Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ, Glasberg BR. A comparison of two-channel and single-channel compression hearing aids. Audiology 1986; 25: 210–26.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore BCJ, Glasberg BR. A comparison of four methods of implementing automatic gain control (AGC) in hearing aids. Br J Audiol 1988; 22: 93–104.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore BCJ, Glasberg BR. A model of loudness perception applied to cochlear hearing loss. Auditory Neurosci 1997; 3: 289–311.
   Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ, Glasberg BR, Stone MA. Optimization of a slow-acting automatic gain control system for use in hearing aids. Br J Audiol 1991; 25: 171–82.
   Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ, Laurence RF, Wright D. Improvements in speech intelligibility in quiet and in noise produced by two-channel compression hearing aids. Br J Audiol 1985; 19: 175–87.
   Google Scholar
• Moore BCJ, Johnson JS, Clark TM, Pluvinage V. Evaluation of a dual-channel full dynamic range compression system for people with sensorineural hearing Loss. Ear Hear 1992; 13: 349–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plomp R. The negative effect of amplitude compression in multichannel hearing aids in the light of the modulation-transfer function. J Acoust Soc Am 1988; 83: 2322–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringdahl A, Eriksson-Mangold M, Israelsson B, Lindkvist A, Mangold S. Clinical trials with a programmable hearing aid set for various listening environments. Br J Audiol 1990; 24: 235–42.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sone T, Suzuki Y, Asano F, Takasaka T, Ohashi M, Yamaguchi K. A portable digital hearing aid with narrow-band loudness compensation and the fitting system for it. Proc 15th ICA 1995; 1: 265–68.
   Google Scholar
• Suzuki Y, Sone T. Frequency characteristics of loudness perception: principles and applications. In: Schick A, ed. Contributions to psychological acoustics. Results of the Sixth Oldenburg Symposium on Psychological Acoustics. BIS Universität Oldenburg, 1993; 193–221.
   Google Scholar
• Suzuki Y, Ise T, Asano F, Sone T, Ohyama K, Takasaka T. Measurement of loudness functions with the subdivision rating scale method and the conventional rating scale method (in Japanese with English abstract). Audiol Jap 1995; 38: 803–16.
   Google Scholar
• Thoronton AR, Abbas PJ. Low-frequency hearing loss. Percep-tion of filtered speech, psychophysical tuning curves, and masking. J Acoust Soc Am 1980; 67: 638–43.
   Google Scholar
• Turner CW, Burns EM, Nelson DA. Pure tone pitch perception and low-frequency hearing loss. J Acoust Soc Am 1983; 73: 966–75.
   Google Scholar
• Van Tasell DJ. Hearing loss, speech, and hearing aids (review). J Speech Hear Res 1993; 36: 228–44.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Villchur E. Signal processing to improve speech intelligibility in perceptive deafness. J Acoust Soc Am 1973; 53: 1646-57. Villchur E. Comments on 'the negative effect of amplitude compression in multichannel hearing aids in the light of the modulation-transfer function'. J Acoust Soc Am 1989; 86: 425–8.
   Google Scholar
• Yund EW, Simon HJ, Efron R. Speech discrimination with an 8-channel compression hearing aid and conventional aids in background of speech-band noise. J Rehab Res Develop 1987; 24: 161–80.
   Google Scholar
• Walden BE, Demorest ME, Hepler EL. Self-report approach to assessing benefit derived from amplification. J Speech Hear Res 1984; 27: 49–56.
   Google Scholar