Multiple benefits of personal FM system use by children with auditory processing disorder (APD)

References

• American Academy of Audiology (AAA), in press. Clinical Guidelines on Auditory Processing Disorder.
   Google Scholar
• American National Standards Institute (ANSI). 2002. American National Standard Acoustical Performance Criteria, Design Requirements, and Guidelines for Schools
   Google Scholar
• American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. 2005. (Central) Auditory Processing Disorders—the Role of the Audiologist [position statement]. Available from, , www.asha.org/policy.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson K. Screening instrument for targeting educational risk (SIFTER). Educational Audiology Association, Tampa, FL 1989
   Google Scholar
• Anderson K., Goldstein H. Speech perception benefits of FM and infrared devices to children with hearing aids in a typical classroom. Lang Speech Hear Serv Sch 2004; 35: 169–184
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson K., Smaldino J. The listening inventories for education (LIFE). Educational Audiology Association, Tampa, FL 1998
   Google Scholar
• Bess F., Dodd-Murphy J., Parker R. Children with minimal sensorineural hearing loss: Prevalence, educational performance, and functional status. Ear Hear 1998; 19(5)339–354
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bess F., Tharpe A. An introduction to unilateral sensorineural hearing loss in children. Ear Hear 1986; 7: 3–13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bradley J.S. Speech intelligibility studies in classrooms. J Acoust Soc Am 1986; 80: 846–854
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chermak G., Musiek F. Central Auditory Processing Disorders: New Perspectives. Singular Publishing, San Diego, CA 1997
   Google Scholar
• Crandell C. Individual differences in speech recognition ability: Implications for hearing aid selection. Ear Hear Suppl 1991; 12(6)100s–107
   Google Scholar
• Crandell C. Classroom acoustics for hearing-impaired children. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 92(4)2470
   Google Scholar
• Crandell C., Charlton M., Kinder M., Kreisman B.M. Effects of portable sound field FM systems on speech perception in noise. Educ Aud J 2001; 9: 7–12
   Google Scholar
• Crandell C., Smaldino J. The importance of room acoustics. Assistive Devices for the Hearing Impaired, R. Tyler, D. Schum. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, MD 1994; 142–164
   Google Scholar
• Crandell C., Smaldino J. An update of classroom acoustics for children with hearing impairment. Volta Review 1995; 1: 4–12
   Google Scholar
• Crandell C., Smaldino J. Room acoustics for listeners with normal-hearing and hearing impairment. Audiology Treatment, M. Valente, H. Hosford-Dunn, R.J. Roeser. Thieme, New York, NY 2000; 601–637
   Google Scholar
• Crandell C., Smaldino J. Room acoustics and auditory rehabilitation technology. Handbook of Clinical AudiologyFifth Edition, J. Katz. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, MD 2002; 607–630
   Google Scholar
• Crandell C., Smaldino J., Flexer C. Sound Field Amplification: Applications to Speech Perception and Classroom AcousticsSecond Edition. Thomson Delmar Learning, Clifton Park, NY 2005
   Google Scholar
• Davis J., Elfenbein J., Schum D., Bentler R. Effects of mild and moderate hearing impairments of language, educational, and psychosocial behavior of children. J Speech Hear Disord 1986; 51: 53–62
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fabry D. Noise reduction with FM systems in FM/EM mode. Ear Hear 1994; 15: 82–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finitzo-Hieber T. Classroom acoustics. Auditory Disorders in School ChildrenSecond Edition, R. Roeser. Thieme-Stratton, New York, NY 1988; 221–223
   Google Scholar
• Finitzo-Hieber T., Tillman W. Room acoustics effects on monosyllabic word discrimination ability for normal and hearing-impaired children. J Speech Hear Res 1978; 21(3)440–458
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gatehouse S. The contribution of central auditory factors to auditory disability. Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 1991; 476: 182–188
   Google Scholar
• Glasberg B.R., Moore B.C.J. Psychoacoustic abilities of subjects with unilateral and bilateral cochlear impairments and their relationship to the ability to understand speech. Scand Audiol Suppl 1989; 32: 1–25
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glasberg B.R., Moore B.C.J., Bacon S.P. Gap detection and masking in hearing-impaired and normal-hearing subjects. J Acoust Soc Am 1987; 81: 1546–1556
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grose J.H., Hall J.W. Comodulation masking release for speech stimuli. J Acoust Soc Am 1992; 91(2)1042–1050
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hawkins D. Comparisons of speech recognition in noise by mildly- to moderately-hearing-impaired children using hearing aids and FM systems. J Speech Hear Disord 1984; 49: 409–418
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hicks C.B., Tharpe A. Listening effort and fatigue in school-age children with and without hearing loss. J Speech Lang Hear Res 1992; 45: 573–584
   Google Scholar
• Irwin R.J., McAuley S.F. Relations among temporal acuity, hearing loss, and the perception of speech distorted by noise and reverberation. J Acoust Soc Am 1987; 81(5)1557–1565
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Knecht H.A., Nelson P.B., Whitelaw G.M., Feth L.L. Background noise levels and reverberation times in unoccupied classrooms: Predictions and measurements. Am J Audiol 2002; 11: 65–71
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Konkle D.F., Beasley D.S., Bess F.H. Intelligibility of time-altered speech in relation to chronological aging. J Speech Hear Res 1977; 20: 108–115
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kreisman, N.V. 2007. Psychosocial status of children with auditory processing disorder. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Florida.
   Google Scholar
• Kreisman, N.V., Crandell, C. & Hall, J.W. III. 2004. Children with APD: Emotional and social health status. Paper presented at the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association 2004 Annual Convention, Philadelphia, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Markides A. Speech levels and speech-to-noise ratios. Br J Audiol 1986; 20: 115–120
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marston L.E., Goetzinger C.P. A comparison of sensitized words and sentences for distinguishing non-peripheral auditory changes as a function of aging. Cortex 1972; 8: 213–223
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Neuman A., Hochberg I. Children's perception of speech in reverberation. J Acoust Soc Am 1983; 73(6)2145–2149
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nilsson M., Soli S., Sullivan J. Development of the hearing in noise test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 1994; 95(2)1085–1099
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olsen W. The effects of noise and reverberation on speech intelligibility. Amplification in Education, F. Bess, B. Freeman, J. Sinclair. Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf, Washington, DC 1981; 225–236
   Google Scholar
• Orchik D.J., Burgess J. Synthetic sentence identification as a function of the age of the listener. J Am Audiol Soc 1977; 3(1)42–46
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Redmond S. The use of rating scales with children who have language impairments. Am J Speech Lang Pathol 2002; 11: 124–138
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reynolds C., Kamphaus R. BASC-2: Behavior Assessment System for ChildrenSecond Edition. AGS Publishing, Circle Pines, MN 2004
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg G., Blake-Rahter P, Heavner J., et al. Improving classroom acoustics (ICA): A three-year FM sound field classroom amplification study. J Educ Audiol 1999; 7: 8–28
   Google Scholar
• Schafer E.C., Thibodeau L.M. Speech recognition in noise in children with bilateral cochlear implants while listening in bilateral, bimodal input, and FM-system arrangements. Am J Audiol 2006; 15: 114–126
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smaldino J., Crandell C. Speech perception in the classroom. Sound Field Amplification: Applications to Speech Perception and Classroom AcousticsSecond Edition, C. Crandell, J. Smaldino, C. Flexer. Thompson Delmar Learning, Clifton Park, NY 2004; 49–56
   Google Scholar
• Snell K.B., Mape F.M., Hickma E.D., Frisini D.R. Word recognition in competing babble and the effects of age, temporal processing, and absolute sensitivity. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 112(2)720–727
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stach B.A., Loiselle L.H., Jerger J.F., Mintz S.L., Taylor C.D. Clinical experience with personal FM assistive listening devices. Hear J 1987; 40(5)24–30
   Google Scholar
• Tyler R.S., Summerfield Q., Wood E.J., Fernandes M.A. Psychoacoustic and phonetic temporal processing in normal and hearing-impaired listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 1982; 72: 740–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wasson J., Kairys S., Nelson E., Kalishman N., Baribeau P. A short survey for assessing health and social problems of adolescents. J Fam Practice 1994; 38: 489–494
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar