The field of Danish audiology: A historical perspective

References

• Danish Audiology 1951–1976. Nyt Nordisk Forlag, Arnold Busck, 1976.
   Google Scholar
• Jacobsson K. Social kontroll i dövvärlden. Lunds Universitet: Sociologiska Institutionen. 1997
   Google Scholar
• Jacobsson K. Retoriska strider: konkurrerande sanningar i dövvärlden. Palmkrons Förlag, Lund 2000
   Google Scholar
• Lindstad J. Høreomsorgen i Danmark. Vurderinger og holdninger blandt personer med høretab. Centre for Alternative Social Studies, CASA 2008
   Google Scholar
• Boolsen, MW., Hvor mange og hvem er hørehæmmede?:Nogle hovedtal. Socialforskningsinstituttet; 1992; 1–30.
   Google Scholar
• Karlsmose B, Lauritzen T, Engberg M, Parving A. A five-year longitudinal study of hearing in a Danish rural population aged 31–50 years. Br J Audiol. 2000; 34: 47–55
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen NHM. Hva' så? Høretab, emotioner, trivsel og integration blandt unge hørehæmmede i et sociologisk perspektiv. University of Copenhagen: Department of Sociology. 2008
   Google Scholar
• Emirbayer M. Manifesto for a relational sociology. Am J Sociol 1997; 103: 281–317
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourdieu P, Wacquant L. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1992
   Google Scholar
• Bourdieu P. Science of Science and Reflexivity. Polity. 2001
   Google Scholar
• Thomsen KA, Jepsen O. Otolaryngologiens historie i Danmark. 1999
   Google Scholar
• Røjskjær C. Tanker om klinisk-tekniske forskningsopgaver inden for audiologien. Nordisk Audiologi 1961; 10: 71–9
   Google Scholar
• Røjskjær C. Monaural speech audiometry. Poul Søndergaard, Odense 1952
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen KO, Parving A. Undersøgelse af ordmaterialer i klinisk taleaudiometri. Ugeskrift for Læger 1986; 148: 441–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Parving A, Barfoed J, Salomon G, Danielsen K. Taleaudiometri, klinisk og socialt. Ugeskrift for Læger 1976; 138: 237–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elberling C, Ludvigsen C, Lyregaard PE. Dantale: a new Danish speech material. Scand Audiol 1989; 18: 169–75
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludvigsen C. Processing for optimun speech intelligibility. Hear Instrum. 1992; 43: 8
   Google Scholar
• Parving A. The value of speech audiometry in hearing aid rehabilitation. Scand Audiol 1991; 20: 159–64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salomon G, Parving A, Danielsen K. Definitioner og gradueringer af høreskader og kommunikationshandicap til brug ved medico-legale kompensationer. Ugeskrift for Læger 1985; 147: 685–92
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Metz O. Acoustic impedance measured on normal and pathological ears. Acta Oto-Laryngol 1946; 63 (Suppl): 1–245
   Google Scholar
• Fiellau-Nicolajsen M. Tympanometry and secretory otitis media. Acta Oto-Laryngologica 1983; 394 (Suppl): 1–73
   Google Scholar
• Jepsen O. Studies on the acoustic stapedial reflex in man. Universitetsforlaget, Aarhus 1955
   Google Scholar
• Therkildsen K, Thomsen KA. The influence of pressure variations on the impedance of the human eardrum. A method for objective determination of the middle ear pressure. J Laryngol Otol 1959; 73: 409–18
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen, HB, Lieth, LVD. Vision and hearing in communication. In: Danish Audiology 1951–1976. Nyt Nordisk Forlag, Arnold Busck; 1976; 229–46.
   Google Scholar
• Skamris NP. Mundaflæsning. En undersøgelse af døvblevnes og normalthørendes mundaflæsningsevne. 1983
   Google Scholar
• Geisler CG, Frishkopf KS, Rosenblith WA. Extracranial responses to acoustic clicks in man. Science 1958; 128: 1210–1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elberling C. Some aspects of electrocochleography. FADL's Publishing Co, Copenhagen 1977
   Google Scholar
• Salomon G. Electric Response Audiometry (ERA) from the Vertex in Paedoaudiology: Technical Basis, Clinical Results and new Developments. FADL's Publishing Co, Copenhagen 1977
   Google Scholar
• Terkildsen K, Osterhammel P, Huis in't Veld K. Far field electrocochleography, electrode positions. Scand Audiol 1974; 3: 123–9
   Google Scholar
• Parving A. Hearing disorders in childhood: some procedures for detection, identification and diagnostic evaluation. Thesis. 1985
   Google Scholar
• Thomsen J. Acusticus Neurinomer. Diagnostik og behandling ved translabyrintær operation. 1982
   Google Scholar
• Elberling C, Osterhammel PA. Auditory Electrophysiology in Clinical Practice. Oticon. 1989
   Google Scholar
• John MS, Picton TW. Human auditory steady-state responses to amplitude-modulated tones: phase and latency measurements. Hear Res 2000; 141: 57–79
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gold T. Hearing. 2. The Physical Basis of the Action of the Cochlea. Proc. Roy. Soc., London Series B-Biological Sciences 1948; 135: 492–8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pumphrey RJ, Gold T. Phase memory of the ear: a proof of the resonance hypothesis. Nature 1948; 161: 640
   Google Scholar
• Gold T. New ideas in science. J Sci Explor 1989; 3: 103–12
   Google Scholar
• Kemp DT. Stimulated acoustic emissions from within human auditory system. J Acoust Soc Am 1978; 64: 1386–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnsen NJ, Bagi P, Elberling C. Evoked acoustic emissions from the human ear .3. Findings in Neonates. Scand Audiol 1983; 12: 17–24
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Konrádsson KS, Kjaerboel E, Boerch K. Introducing universal newborn hearing screening in Denmark: preliminary results from the city of Copenhagen. Audiol Med 2007; 5: 176–81
   Google Scholar
• Norton SJ, Gorga MP, Widen JE, Folsom RC, Sininger Y, Cone-Wesson B, et al. Identification of neonatal hearing impairment: a multicentre investigation. Ear Hear 2000; 21: 348–56
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox RM, Alexander GC. Evaluation of an in situ output probe-microphone method for hearing aid fitting verification. Ear Hear 1990; 11: 31–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedersen B, Lauridsen O, Nielsen HB. Clinical measurement of hearing aid insertion gain. Scand Audiol 1982; 11: 181–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gimsing S. Høreapparatbenyttelse og betjeningsfærdigheder. Ugeskrift for Læger 1995; 157: 6993–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ewertsen HW, Birk-Nielsen H. Social hearing handicap index. Audiology 1973; 12: 180–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO . International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities, and Handicaps. GenevaSwitzerland: World Health Organization, 1980.
   Google Scholar
• WHO . International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health – ICF. GenevaSwitzerland: World Health Organization, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Hallberg LR-M. Hearing impairment, coping and perceived handicap. University of Göteborg: Department of Psychology. 1992
   Google Scholar
• Hetu R, Lalonde M, Getty L. Psychosocial disadvantages associated with occupational hearing loss as experienced in the family. Audiology 1987; 26: 141–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringdahl A, Eriksson-Mangold M, Andersson G. Psychometric evaluation of the Gothenburg Profile for measurement of experienced hearing disability and handicap: applications with new hearing aid candidates and experienced hearing aid users. Br J Audiol 1998; 32: 375–85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephens D, Hetu R. Impairment, disability and handicap in audiology: towards a consensus. Audiology 1991; 30: 185–200
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Noble W. Self-assessment of hearing and related functions. Whurr Publishers Ltd, London 1998
   Google Scholar
• Hyde ML. Reasonable psychometric standards for self-report outcome measures in audiological rehabilitation. Ear Hear 2000; 21: S24–36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kricos PB. The influence of non-audiological variables on audiological rehabilitation outcomes. Ear Hear 2000; 21: S7–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R, Hyde M, Gatehouse S, Noble W, Dillon H, Bentler R, et al. Optimal outcome measures, research priorities, and international cooperation. Ear Hear 2000; 21: S106–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
• Arlinger S. Improved benefit from new hearing aid technology: more fact than fiction. J Aud Med 2002; 11: 75–9
   Google Scholar
• Maki-Torkko EM, Brorsson B, Davis A, Mair IWS, Myhre KI, Parving A, et al. Hearing impairment among adults: extent of the problem and scientific evidence on the outcome of hearing aid rehabilitation. Scand Audiol 2001; 30: 8–15
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parving A. The hearing aid revolution: fact or fiction?. Acta Oto-Laryngol 2003; 123: 245–48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor RS, Paisley S, Davis A. Systematic review of the clinical and cost effectiveness of digital hearing aids. Br J Audiol 2001; 35: 271–88
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pedersen L, Møller TR, Wetke R, Ovesen T. Neonatal hearing screening. A comparison of automatic auditory brainstem audiometry and otoacoustic emissions. Ugeskrift for Læger 2008; 170: 642–6
   Google Scholar
• Jones L. Future perfect: social aspects of genetics and deafness. The impact of genetic hearing impairment, D Stephens, L Jones. Whurr Publishers Ltd, London 2005; 1–10
   Google Scholar
• Middleton A. Parents' attitudes towards genetic testing and the impact of deafness in the family. The impact of genetic hearing impairment, D Stephens, L Jones. Whurr Publishers Ltd, London 2005; 11–53
   Google Scholar
• Parving A, Sibelle P. An audit of hearing rehabilitation within the health service – past and present. Scand Audiol 1995; 24: 33–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulsen PB, Hørder M, Jørgensen T. Fremtidens medicinske metoder – tidlig varsling i internationalt og dansk perspektiv. Sundhedsstyrelsens Udvalg for Medicinsk Teknologivurdering, Sundhedsstyrelsen 1996
   Google Scholar
• Nøgletal for udlevering af høreapparat (Audiologi) . Sundhedsstyrelsen/Ministeriet for Sundhed og Forebyggelse. 2008.
   Google Scholar
• May C, Rapley T, Moreira T, Finch T, Heaven B. Technogovernance: evidence, subjectivity, and the clinical encounter in primary care medicine. Soc Sci Med 2006; 62: 1022–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar