149 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16295232)
1. Fitting hearing aids to adults using prescriptive methods: an evidence-based review of effectiveness.
Mueller HG
J Am Acad Audiol; 2005; 16(7):448-60. PubMed ID: 16295232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparing NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 in Hearing Aids Fit to Children with Severe or Profound Hearing Loss: Goodness of Fit-to-Targets, Impacts on Predicted Loudness and Speech Intelligibility.
Ching TY; Quar TK; Johnson EE; Newall P; Sharma M
J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Mar; 26(3):260-74. PubMed ID: 25751694
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparing loudness normalization (IHAFF) with speech intelligibility maximization (NAL-NL1) when implemented in a two-channel device.
Keidser G; Grant F
Ear Hear; 2001 Dec; 22(6):501-15. PubMed ID: 11770672
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Transitioning hearing aid users with severe and profound loss to a new gain/frequency response: benefit, perception, and acceptance.
Convery E; Keidser G
J Am Acad Audiol; 2011 Mar; 22(3):168-80. PubMed ID: 21545769
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. An initial-fit comparison of two generic hearing aid prescriptive methods (NAL-NL2 and CAM2) to individuals having mild to moderately severe high-frequency hearing loss.
Johnson EE
J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Feb; 24(2):138-50. PubMed ID: 23357807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparison of gain for adults from generic hearing aid prescriptive methods: impacts on predicted loudness, frequency bandwidth, and speech intelligibility.
Johnson EE; Dillon H
J Am Acad Audiol; 2011; 22(7):441-59. PubMed ID: 21993050
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Using trainable hearing aids to examine real-world preferred gain.
Mueller HG; Hornsby BW; Weber JE
J Am Acad Audiol; 2008; 19(10):758-73. PubMed ID: 19358456
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Fitting recommendations and clinical benefit associated with use of the NAL-NL2 hearing-aid prescription in Nucleus cochlear implant recipients.
English R; Plant K; Maciejczyk M; Cowan R
Int J Audiol; 2016; 55 Suppl 2():S45-50. PubMed ID: 26853233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Preferred listening levels of children who use hearing aids: comparison to prescriptive targets.
Scollie SD; Seewald RC; Moodie KS; Dekok K
J Am Acad Audiol; 2000 Apr; 11(4):230-8. PubMed ID: 10783926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Prescribed real-ear and achieved real-life differences in children's hearing aids adjusted according to the NAL-NL1 and the DSL v.4.1 prescriptions.
Ching TY; Scollie SD; Dillon H; Seewald R; Britton L; Steinberg J
Int J Audiol; 2010 Jan; 49 Suppl 1():S16-25. PubMed ID: 20109083
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures.
Byrne D; Dillon H; Ching T; Katsch R; Keidser G
J Am Acad Audiol; 2001 Jan; 12(1):37-51. PubMed ID: 11214977
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Is normal or less than normal overall loudness preferred by first-time hearing aid users?
Smeds K
Ear Hear; 2004 Apr; 25(2):159-72. PubMed ID: 15064661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prescriptive amplification recommendations for hearing losses with a conductive component and their impact on the required maximum power output: an update with accompanying clinical explanation.
Johnson EE
J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Jun; 24(6):452-60. PubMed ID: 23886423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Implications of high-frequency cochlear dead regions for fitting hearing aids to adults with mild to moderately severe hearing loss.
Cox RM; Johnson JA; Alexander GC
Ear Hear; 2012; 33(5):573-87. PubMed ID: 22555183
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. An examination of the practicality of the simplex procedure.
Preminger JE; Neuman AC; Bakke MH; Walters D; Levitt H
Ear Hear; 2000 Jun; 21(3):177-93. PubMed ID: 10890726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Probe microphone measurements: 20 years of progress.
Mueller HG
Trends Amplif; 2001 Jun; 5(2):35-68. PubMed ID: 25425897
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Investigation of hearing aid fitting according to the national acoustic laboratories' prescription for non-linear hearing aids and the desired sensation level methods in Japanese speakers: a crossover-controlled trial.
Furuki S; Sano H; Kurioka T; Nitta Y; Umehara S; Hara Y; Yamashita T
Auris Nasus Larynx; 2023 Oct; 50(5):708-713. PubMed ID: 36792399
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. A cross-over, double-blind comparison of the NAL-NL1 and the DSL v4.1 prescriptions for children with mild to moderately severe hearing loss.
Ching TY; Scollie SD; Dillon H; Seewald R
Int J Audiol; 2010 Jan; 49 Suppl 1():S4-15. PubMed ID: 20109088
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Fitting hearing aids using clinical measures of loudness discomfort levels: an evidence-based review of effectiveness.
Mueller HG; Bentler RA
J Am Acad Audiol; 2005; 16(7):461-72. PubMed ID: 16295233
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Listener Factors Explain Little Variability in Self-Adjusted Hearing Aid Gain.
Perry TT; Nelson PB; Van Tasell DJ
Trends Hear; 2019; 23():2331216519837124. PubMed ID: 30880645
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
