Linear and nonlinear hearing aid fittings – 1. Patterns of benefit

References

• British Society of Audiology. Recommended procedure for pure-tone audiometry using a manually operated instrument. Br J Audiol 1981; 15: 213–216
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bentler R., Nelson J. Assessing release-time options in a two-channel AGC hearing aid. J Am Acad Audiol 1997; 6: 43–51
   Google Scholar
• Bray, V. & Nilsson, M. 2002. What digital hearing aids can do: Another perspective. Hear J, 55:4 (60–61, 64).
   Google Scholar
• Byrne D. Theoretical approaches for hearing aid selection. The Vanderbilt hearing aid report: state of the art – research needs, GA Studebaker, FH Bess. Monographs in Comtemporary Audiology, Upper Darby, PA 1982
   Google Scholar
• Byrne D., Dillon H. The National Acoustic Laboratories’ (NAL) new procedure for selecting the gain and frequency response of a hearing aid (175–179). Ear Hear 1986; 7(4)257–265
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne D., Dillon H., Ching T., Katsch R., Keidser G. NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures. J Am Acad Audiol 2001; 12(1)37–51
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cornelisse L.E., Seewald R.C., Jamieson D.G. The input/output formula: a theoretical approach to the fitting of personal amplification devices. J Acoust Soc Am 1995; 97(3)1854–1864
   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. Administration and application of the APHAB. Hear J 1997; 50(4)32–48
   Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C. Maturation of hearing aid benefit subjective and objective measurements. Ear Hear 1992; 13(3)131–141
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R., Alexander G.C. The abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit. Ear & Hear 1995; 16(2)176–186
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C. Measuring Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life: the SADL scale. Ear Hear 1999; 20(4)306–20
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Moore J.N. Composite speech spectrum for hearing aid gain prescriptions. J Speech Hear Res 1988; 31: 102–107
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dillon H. Compression? Yes, but for low or high frequencies, for how or high intensities, and with what response times. Ear Hear 1996; 17(4)287–307
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillon H. Hearing aids. Boomerang Press, Sydney 2001
   Google Scholar
• Dreschler W.A., Verschuure H., Ludvigsen C., Westermann S. ICRA noises: artificial noise signals with speech-like spectral and temporal properties for hearing aid assessment. Audiology 2001; 40: 148–157
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elberling C. Loudness scaling revisited. J Am Acad Audiol 1999; 10(5)248–260
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elberling C., Nielsen C. The dynamics of speech and the auditory dynamic range in sensorineural hearing impairment. Recent developments in hearing instrument technology. 15th Danavox Symposium, J. Beilin, G.R. Jensen, 1993; 99–133
   Google Scholar
• Foster J.R., Haggard M.P. The Four Alternative Auditory Feature test (FAAF) – linguistic and psychometric properties of the material with normative data in noise. Br J Audiol 1987; 21: 165–174
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gabrielsson A., Sjogren H. Perceived sound quality of hearing aids. Scand Audiol 1979; 8: 159–169
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gatehouse S. Apparent auditory deprivation effects of late onset: the role of presentation level. J Acoust Soc Am 1989; 86(6)2103–2106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S. Role of perceptual acclimatisation in the selection of frequency responses for hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol 1993; 4(5)296–306
   PubMedGoogle 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., Killion M. HABRAT: Hearing aid brain rewiring accommodation time. Hear Instrum 1993; 44(10)29–32
   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. Linear and nonlinear hearing aids – 2. patterns of candidature. Int J Audiol 2006; 45: 153–171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S., Noble W. The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). Int J Audiol 2004; 43: 85–99
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen M. Effects of multichannel compression time constants on subjectively perceived sound quality and speech intelligibility. Ear Hear 2002; 23(4)369–380
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Electrotechnical Commission, 1983. Hearing aids. Part 2: Hearing aids with automatic gain control circuits. IEC 60118–2–1983, Geneva:IEC.
   Google Scholar
• Jerlvall L.B., Lindblad A.C. The influence of attack time and release time on speech intelligibility. A study of the effects of AGC on normal hearing and hearing impaired subjects. Scand Audiol Suppl. 1978; 6: 341–353
   Google Scholar
• Keidser G. Selecting different amplification for different listening conditions. J Am Acad Audiol 1996; 7(2)92–104
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Keidser G., Dillon H., Byrne D. Candidates for multiple frequency response characteristics. Ear Hear 1995; 16(6)562–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keidser G., Dillon H., Byrne D. Guidelines for fitting multiple memory hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol 1996; 7: 406–418
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Keissling J. Loudness growth in sensorineural hearing loss – Consequences for hearing aid design and fitting. Audiol. Acoust 1995; 34(2)82–89
   Google Scholar
• King A.B., Martin M.C. Is AGC beneficial in hearing aids?. Br J Audiol. 1984; 18(1)31–38
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kochkin S. Isolating the impact of the volume control on customer satisfaction. Hearing Review 2003; 10(1)26–35
   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
• 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
• Macrae J., Dillon H. Gain, frequency response, and maximum output requirements for hearing aids. J Rehab Res Dev. 1986; 33(4)363–376
   Google Scholar
• Moore B.C.J. A comparison of four methods of implementing automatic gain control (AGC) in hearing aids. Br J Audiol 1998; 22: 93–104
   Google Scholar
• Moore B.C.J, Glasberg B.R., Stone M.A. Effect on the speech reception threshold in noise of the recovery time of the compressor in the high-frequency channel of a two-channel aid. Scand Audiol Suppl 1993; 38: 82–91
   PubMedGoogle 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
   Google Scholar
• Moore B.C.J., Stainsby T.H., Alcantara J.I., Kuhnel V. The effect on speech intelligibility of varying compression time constants in a digital hearing aid. Int J Audiol 2004; 43: 300–409
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muller T.F., Harris F.P., Ellison J.C. Effect of Release Time on Preferred Gain and Speech Acoustics. J Am Acad.Audiol 2004; 15: 605–615
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nabelek I.V., Robinette L.N. A comparison of hearing aids with amplitude compression. Audiology 1977; 16(1)73–85
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE), July, 2000. Guidance on Hearing Aid Technology. ISBN 1-84257–023–4.
   Google Scholar
• Naylor G. Technical and audiological factors in the implementation and use of digital signal processing hearing aids. Scand Audiol 1997; 26(4)223–229
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuman A.C., Bakke M.H., Mackersie C., Hellman S., Levitt H. Effect of release time in compression hearing aids: Paired-comparison judgements of quality. J Acoust Soc Am 1995; 98(6)3182–3187
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neuman A.C., Bakke M.H., Mackersie C., Hellman S., Levitt H. The effect of compression ratio and release time on the categorical rating of sound quality. J Acoust Soc Am 1998; 103(5)2273–2281
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Noble W. Self-assessment of Hearing and Related Functions. Whurr Publishers Ltd. 1998
   Google Scholar
• Novick M.L., Bentler R.A., Dittberner A., Flamme G.A. Effects of release time and directionality on unilateral and bilateral hearing aid fittings in complex sound fields. J Am Acad Audiol 2001; 12: 534–544
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pocock S J. Clinical Trials: A Practical Approach. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, London 1990
   Google Scholar
• Ricketts T.A., Bentler R.A. The effect of test signal type and bandwidth on the categorical scaling of loudness. J Acoust Soc Am 1996; 99: 2281–2287
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz D., Lyregaard P., Lundh P. Hearing aid selection for severe-to-profound hearing loss. Hear J 1988; 41(2)13–17
   Google Scholar
• Schweitzer H.C., Causey G.D. The relative importance of recovery time in compression hearing aids. Audiology 1977; 16(1)61–72
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stone M.A., Moore B.C.J., Alcantara J.I., Glasberg B.R. Comparison of different forms of compression using wearable digital hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 1999; 106: 3603–3619
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Surr R.K., Cord M.T., Walden B.E. Response of hearing aid wearers to the absence of a user-operated volume control. Hear J 2001; 54(4)32–36
   Google Scholar
• Valente M., van Vliet D. The independent hearing aid fitting forum (IHAFF) protocol. Trends in Amplification 1997; 2: 6–35
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Van Toor T., Verschuure H. Effects of high-frequency emphasis and compression time constants on speech intelligibility in noise. Int J Audiol 2002; 41: 379–394
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar