Linear and nonlinear hearing aid fittings – 2. Patterns of candidature

References

• Abed, A. & Cain, D. 1984. The host windowing technique for FIR filter design. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech and signal Processing, ASSP-32.
   Google Scholar
• Baer T., Moore B.C.J., Kluk K. Effects of low pass filtering on the intelligibility of speech in noise for people with and without dead regions at high frequencies. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 112(3)1133–1144
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boothroyd A., Springer N., Smith L., Schulman J. Amplitude compression and profound hearing loss. J Speech Hear Res 1988; 31: 362–376
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boothroyd A. Auditory capacity of hearing-impaired children using hearing aids and cochlear implants: issues of efficacy and assessment. Scand Audiol Suppl 1999; 46: 17–25
   Google Scholar
• British Society of Audiology. Recommended procedure for pure-tone bone-conduction audiometry without masking using a manually operated instrument. Br J Audiol 1985; 19: 281–282
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• British Society of Audiology. Recommended procedure for uncomfortable loudness level (ULL). Br J Audiol 1987; 21: 231
   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(4)257–265
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox, R. 1995. Using loudness data for hearing aid selection: The IHAFF approach. Hear J, 48(2), 10:39–44.
   Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C., Gray G. Personality and the subjective assessment of hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol 1999; 10: 1–13
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elberling C. Loudness scaling revisited. J Am Acad Audiol 1999; 10(5)248–260
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gantz B.J., Woodworth G.G., Abbas P.J., Knutson J.F., Tyler R.S. Multivariate predictors of audiological success with multi-channel cochlear implants. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1993; 102: 909–916
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S. Components and determinants of hearing aid benefit. Ear Hear 1994; 15(1)30–49
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S. Glasgow Hearing Aid Benefit Profile: derivation and validation of a client-centered outcome measure for hearing aid services. J Am Acad Audiol 1999; 10(2)80–103
   Google Scholar
• Gatehouse, S., Elberling, C., & Naylor, G. 1999. Aspects of auditory ecology and psychoacoustic function as determinants of benefits from and candidature for nonlinear processing in hearing aids. In Auditory models and nonlinear hearing instruments. 18^th Danavox Symposium. 221–233.
   Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S., Naylor G., Elberling C. Benefits from hearing aids in relation to the interaction between the user and the environment. Int J Audiol 2003; 42: S77–S85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatehouse, S., Naylor, G., & Elberling, C. (2006). Linear and nonlinear hearing aids – 1. patterns of benefit. Int J Audiol, 45, 130–152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humes L.E., Watson B.U., Christensen L.A., Cokely C.G., Halling D.C., et al. Factors associated with individual differences in clinical measures of speech recognition among the elderly. J Am Speech Hear Res 1994; 37: 465–474
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kiessling J. Loudness growth in sensorineural hearing loss – Consequences for hearing aid design and fitting. Audiol Acoust 1995; 34(2)82–89
   Google Scholar
• Knutson J.F., Schartz H.A., Gantz B.J., Tyler R.S., Hinriches J.V., et al. Psychological change following 18 months of cochlear implant use. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1991; 100: 877–882
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Launer S., Holube I., Hohmann V., Kollmeier B. Categorical loudness scaling in hearing-impaired listeners – Can loudness growth be predicted from the audiogram?. Audiol Acoust 1996; 35(4)156–163
   Google Scholar
• Launer S., Moore B.C.J. Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting. V On-line gain control in a digital hearing aid. Int J Audiol 2003; 42: 262–273
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunner T. Cognitive function in relation to hearing aid use. Int J Audiol 2003; 42: S49–S58
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunner T., Hellgren J., Arlinger S., Elberling C. A digital filterbank hearing aid: Predicting user preference and performance for two signal progressing algorithms. Ear Hear 1997a; 18(1)12–25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunner T., Hellgren J., Arlinger S., Elberling C. A digital filterbank hearing aid: Three DSP algorithms – User preference and performance. Ear Hear 1997b; 18(5)373–387
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyxell B., Andersson J., Arlinger S., Bredberg G., Harder H., et al. Verbal information-processing capabilities and cochlear implants: implications for preoperative predictors of speech performance. Studies in Deaf Education 1996; 1(3)190–201
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mackersie C.L., Crocker T.L., Davis R.A. Limiting High-Frequency Hearing Aid Gain in Listeners with and without Suspected Cochlear Dead Regions. J Am Acad Audiol 2004; 15: 498–507
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moore, B.C.J. 1998. Cochlear Hearing Loss. London: Whurr.
   Google Scholar
• Moore B.C.J. Dead regions in the cochlea: conceptual foundations, diagnosis, and clinical applications. Ear Hear 2004; 25(2)98–116
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B.C.J., Johnson J.S., Clark T.M., Pluvinage V. Evaluation of a dual-channel full dynamic range compression system for people with sensorineural hearing loss. Ear Hear 1992; 13: 349–370
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore B.C.J., Peters R.W., Stone M.A. Benefits of linear amplification and mutli-channel compression for speech comprehension in backgrounds with spectral and temporal dips. J Acoust Soc Am 1999; 105: 400–411
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plomp R. Auditory handicap of hearing impairment and the limited benefit of hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 1978; 63(2)533–549
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trinder J.R. Hardware-software configuration for high-performance digital filtering in real time. Proc. IEEE Conf Audiol Speech Signal Process 1982; 2: 687–690
   Google Scholar
• Van Tasell, Trine, T.R. 1992. Noise reduction hearing aids: Release from masking and release from distortion. Ear Hear, 13:2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verschuure J., Maas A.J.J., Stikvoort E., de Jong R.M., Goedegebure A. Compression and its effects on the speech signal. Ear Hear 1996; 17: 162–175
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wingfield A. Cognitive factors in auditory performance: context, speed of processing, and constraints of memory. J Am Acad Audiol 1996; 7: 175–182
   PubMedGoogle Scholar