Relationships between self-report and cognitive measures of hearing aid outcome

References

• Akeroyd M.A. 2008. Are individual differences in speech reception related to individual differences in cognitive ability? A survey of twenty experimental studies with normal and hearing-impaired adults. International Journal of Audiology, 47 (Suppl. 2): S53–S71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arehart K.H., Souza P., Baca R., Kates J.M. 2013. Working memory, age, and hearing loss: susceptibility to hearing aid distortion. Ear and Hearing, 34(3): 251–260. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0b013e318271aa5e.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baddeley A.D., Logie R., Nimmo-Smith I. 1985. Components of fluent reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 24: 119–131.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baddeley A.D., Wilson B.A. 1985. Phonological coding and short term memory in patients without speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 24: 490–502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boldt J.B., Kjems U., Pedersen M.S., Lunner T., Wang D. (2008, 14–17 September). Estimation of the ideal binary mask using directional systems. Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Acoustic Echo and Noise Control, URL (consulted April, 2013). Available from: http://www.iwaenc.org/proceedings/2008/contents/papers/9062.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Brännström K.J., Wennerström I. 2010. Hearing aid fitting outcome: clinical application and psychometric properties of a Swedish translation of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA). Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 21(8): 512–521.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C. 1992. Maturation of hearing aid benefit: objective and subjective measurements. Ear and Hearing, 13(3): 131–141.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C. 1995. The abbreviated profile of Hearing Aid Benefit. Ear and Hearing, 16(2), 176–186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C. 2000. Expectations about hearing aids and their relationship to fitting outcome. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 11(7): 368–382.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C. 2001. Validation of the SADL questionnaire. Ear and Hearing, 22(2): 151–160.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Alexander G.C. 2002. The International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA): psychometric properties of the English version. International Journal of Audiology, 41(1): 30–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox R.M., Stephens D., Kramer S.E. 2002. Translations of the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA). International Journal of Audiology, 41(1): 3–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Demeester K., Topsakal V., Hendrickx J.J., Fransen E., van Laer L., Van Camp G., et al. 2012. Hearing disability measured by the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale in clinically normal-hearing and hearing-impaired middle-aged persons, and disability screening by means of a reduced SSQ (the SSQ5). Ear and Hearing, 33(5): 615–616.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edwards B. 2007. The future of hearing aid technology. Trends in Amplification, 11(1): 31–45.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Foo C., Rudner M., Rönnberg J., Lunner T. 2007. Recognition of speech in noise with new hearing instrument compression release settings requires explicit cognitive storage and processing capacity. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 18(7): 618–631.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S., Akeroyd M. 2006. Two-eared listening in dynamic situations. International Journal of Audiology, 45 (Suppl. 1): S120–S124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S., Naylor G., Elberling C. 2003. Benefits from hearing aids in relation to the interaction between the user and the environment. International Journal of Audiology, 42 (Suppl. 1): S77–S85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S., Naylor G., Elberling C. 2006. Linear and non-linear hearing aid fittings – 2. Patterns of candidature. International Journal of Audiology, 45(3): 153–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatehouse S., Noble W. 2004. The Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ). International Journal of Audiology, 43(2): 85–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grady C. 2012. The cognitive neuroscience of ageing. Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 13(7): 491–505.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagerman B., Kinnefors C. 1995. Efficient adaptive methods for measuring speech reception threshold in quiet and in noise. Scandinavian Audiology, 24: 71–77.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humes L.E. 2003. Modeling and predicting hearing aid outcome. Trends in Amplification, 7: 41–75.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Humes L.E. 2007. The contributions of audibility and cognitive factors to the benefit provided by amplified speech to older adults. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 18(7): 590–603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hällgren M., Larsby B., Arlinger S. 2006. A Swedish version of the Hearing In Noise Test (HINT) for measurement of speech recognition. International Journal of Audiology, 45(4): 227–237.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hällgren M., Larsby B., Lyxell B., Arlinger S. 2005. Speech understanding in quiet and noise, with and without hearing aids. International Journal of Audiology, 44(10): 574–583.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kochkin S. 2003. MarkeTrak VI: Isolating the impact of the volume control on customer satisfaction. Hearing Review, 10(1): 26–35.
   Google Scholar
• Koelewijn T., Zekveld A.A., Festen J.M., Rönnberg J., Kramer S.E. 2012. Processing load induced by informational masking is related to linguistic abilities. International Journal of Otolaryngology, Article ID 865731, doi: 10.1155/2012/865731
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kramer S.E., Goverts S.T., Dreschler W.A., Boymans M., Festen J.M. 2002. International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA): results from The Netherlands. International Journal of Audiology, 41(1): 36–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer S.E., Kapteyn T.S., Houtgast T. 2006. Occupational performance: comparing normally-hearing and hearing-impaired employees using the Amsterdam Checklist for Hearing and Work. International Journal of Audiology, 45(9): 503–512.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Köbler S., Lindblad A.C., Olofsson A., Hagerman B. 2010. Successful and unsuccessful users of bilateral amplification: differences and similarities in binaural performance. International Journal of Audiology, 49(9): 613–627.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levitt H. 1971. Transformed up-down methods in psychoacoustics. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 49 (2: Suppl. 2): 467–477.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunner T. 2003. Cognitive function in relation to hearing aid use. International Journal of Audiology, 42 (Suppl. 1): S49–S58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunner T., Rudner M., Rönnberg J. 2009. Cognition and hearing aids. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 50(5): 395–403.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunner T., Sundewall-Thorén E. 2007. Interactions between cognition, compression, and listening conditions: Effects on speech-in-noise performance in a two-channel hearing aid. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 18(7): 604–617.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyxell B. 1994. Skilled speechreading: a single-case study. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 35: 212–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattys S.L., Davis M.H., Bradlow A.R., Scott S.K. 2012. Speech recognition in adverse conditions: a review. Language and Cognitive Processes, 27(7–8): 953–978.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mishra S., Lunner T., Stenfelt S., Rönnberg J., Rudner M. (in press). Visual information can hinder working memory processing of speech. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman C.W., Weinstein B.E., Jacobson G.P., Hug G.A. 1990. The Hearing Handicap Inventory for Adults: psychometric adequacy and audiometric correlates. Ear and Hearing, 11(6): 430–433.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ng E.H., Rudner M., Lunner T., Syskind Pedersen M., Rönnberg J. 2013. Effects of noise and working memory capacity on memory processing of speech for hearing aid users. International Journal of Audiology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.3109/14992027.2013.776181.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pichora-Fuller M.K. 2003. Cognitive aging and auditory information processing. International Journal of Audiology, 42 (Suppl. 2): S26–S32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Posner M.I., Mitchell R.F. 1967. Chronometric analysis of classification. Psychological Review, 74: 392–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rönnberg J. 1990. Cognitive and communicative function: the effects of chronological age and ‘handicap–age’. European Journal Cognitive Psychology, 2: 253–274.
   Google Scholar
• Rönnberg J. 2003. Cognition in the hearing impaired and deaf as a bridge between signal and dialogue: a framework and a model. International Journal of Audiology, 42 (Suppl. 1): S68–S76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rönnberg J., Andersson U., Lyxell B., Spens K. 1998. Vibrotactile speech tracking support: Cognitive prerequisites. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 3: 143–156.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rönnberg J., Arlinger S., Lyxell B., Kinnefors C. 1989. Visual evoked potentials: relation to adult speech reading and cognitive function. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 32: 725–735.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rönnberg J., Rudner M., Foo C., Lunner T. 2008. Cognition counts: A working memory system for ease of language understanding (ELU). International Journal of Audiology, 47 (Suppl. 2): S99–S105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudner M., Foo C., Rönnberg J., Lunner T. 2009. Cognition and aided speech recognition in noise: specific role for cognitive factors following nine-week experience with adjusted compression settings in hearing aids. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 50: 405–418.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudner M., Lunner T., Behrens T., Sundwall-Thorén E., Rönnberg J. 2012. Working memory capacity influences perceived effort during aided speech recognition in noise. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 23(8): 577–589.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudner M., Rönnberg J., Lunner T. 2011. Working memory supports listening in noise for persons with hearing impairment. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 22: 156–167.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarampalis A., Kalluri S., Edwards B., Hafter E. 2009. Objective measures of listening effort: effects of background noise and noise reduction. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 52: 1230–1240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders G.H., Forsline A. 2006. The Performance-Perceptual Test (PPT) and its relationship to aided reported handicap and hearing aid satisfaction. Ear and Hearing, 27(3): 229–242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders G.H., Forsline A., Fausti S.A. 2004. The performance-perceptual test and its relationship to unaided reported handicap. Ear and Hearing, 25(2): 117–126.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders G.H., Lewis M.S., Forsline A. 2009. Expectations, prefitting counseling, and hearing aid outcome. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology, 20(5): 320–334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor B. 2007. Predicting real world hearing aid benefit with speech audiometry: An evidence-based review. Audiology Online, URL (consulted March, 2013). Available from: http://www.audiologyonline.com/Articles/article_detail.asp?article_id=1802.
   Google Scholar
• Wang D., Kjems U., Pedersen M.S., Boldt J.B., Lunner T. 2009. Speech intelligibility in background noise with ideal binary time-frequency masking. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 125(4): 2336–2347.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ventry I.M., Weinstein B.E. 1982. The hearing handicap inventory for the elderly: a new tool. Ear and Hearing, 3(3): 128–134.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öberg M., Lunner T., Andersson G. 2007. Psychometric evaluation of hearing specific self-report measures and their associations with psychosocial and demographic variables. Audiological Medicine, 5: 188–199.
   Google Scholar