References
- Louis TA, Lavori PW, Bailar JC, Polansky M. Crossover and self-controlled designs in clinical re-search. N Engl J Med 1984; 1: 24–31.
- Andersen T, Pedersen F, Parving A, Lyregaard PE. Procedure for clinical testing of hearing aids. Scand Audiol 1998; 27: 249–54.
- Arlinger S. Clinical assessment of modern hearing aids. Scand Audiol Suppl 1998; 49: 50–3.
- Hagerman B. Minimum Nordic requirements for clini-cal testing of hearing aids. Scand Audiol 1999; 28: 102–16.
- Noble W. Hearing aid use and benefit. In: Noble W, ed. Self-assessment of hearing and related function. London: Whurr Publishers, 1998: 86–143.
- Banta D. Technologies on trial. Odyssey 1998; 5: 56–7.
- Mäki-Torkko E, Brorsson B, Davis A, et al. Hearing impairment among adults-extent of the problem and scientific evidence on the outcome of hearing aid reha-bilitation. Scand Audiol Suppl 2001; 54: 8–15.
- 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.
- Parving A, Sibelle P. An audit of hearing rehabilitation within the health service-past and present. Scand Audiol 1995; 24: 33–8.
- Parving A, Sibelle P. Clinical study of hearing in-struments: a cross-sectional longitudinal audit based on consumer experiences. Audiology 2001; 40: 43–53.
- ISO389-1. Acoustics-standard reference zero for the calibration of pure-tone air-conduction audiometers. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organisation for Standardization, 1991.
- ISO389-3. Acoustics-reference zero for the calibra-tion of audiometric equipment. Part 3: Reference equivalent threshold force levels for pure tones and bone vibrators. Geneva, Switzerland: International Or-ganisation for Standardization, 1994.
- ISO7566. Acoustics-standard reference zero for the calibration of pure-tone bone conduction audiometers. Geneva, Switzerland: International Organisation for Standardization, 1987.
- ISO8253 1-3. Acoustics-audiometric test methods. Part I. Basic pure-tone air and bone conduction threshold audiometry. Geneva, Switzerland: Interna-tional Organisation for Standardization, 2000.
- Byrne D, Dillon H. The National Acoustic Laborato-ries' (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid. Ear Hear 1986; 7: 257–65.
- Venema T. Compression for clinicians. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group, Inc, 1998.
- Larson VD, Williams DW, Henderson WG, et al. A multi-center, double blind clinical trial comparing benefit from three commonly used hearing aid circuits. Ear Hear 2002; 23: 269–76.
- Parving A. The value of speech audiometry in hearing-aid rehabilitation. Scand Audiol 1991; 20: 159–64.
- Preves DA, Sammeth CA, Wynnet MK. Field trial evaluations of a switched directional/omnidirectional in-the-ear hearing instrument. J Am Acad Audiol 1999; 10: 273–84.
- Hyde M. Reasonable psychometric standards for self-report outcome measures in audiological rehabilitation. Ear Hear 2000; 21: 24–36.
- Bille M, Parving A. Expectations about hearing aids: demographic and audiological predictors. Int I Audiol 2002; submitted.
- Arlinger S. Improved benefit from new hearing-aid technology - more fact than fiction [Letter to the Editor]. J Audiol Med 2002; 11: 75–9.