640 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21993050)
21. Comparison of the NAL(R) and Cambridge formulae for the fitting of linear hearing aids.
Peters RW; Moore BC; Glasberg BR; Stone MA
Br J Audiol; 2000 Feb; 34(1):21-36. PubMed ID: 10759075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Task-Dependent Effects of Signal Audibility for Processing Speech: Comparing Performance With NAL-NL2 and DSL v5 Hearing Aid Prescriptions at Threshold and at Suprathreshold Levels in 9- to 17-Year-Olds With Hearing Loss.
Pittman AL; Stewart EC
Trends Hear; 2023; 27():23312165231177509. PubMed ID: 37254534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. NAL-NL2 empirical adjustments.
Keidser G; Dillon H; Carter L; O'Brien A
Trends Amplif; 2012 Dec; 16(4):211-23. PubMed ID: 23203416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Maximizing effective audibility in hearing aid fitting.
Ching TY; Dillon H; Katsch R; Byrne D
Ear Hear; 2001 Jun; 22(3):212-24. PubMed ID: 11409857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Effects of multi-channel compression time constants on subjectively perceived sound quality and speech intelligibility.
Hansen M
Ear Hear; 2002 Aug; 23(4):369-80. PubMed ID: 12195179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Comparison of Different Hearing Aid Prescriptions for Children.
Marriage JE; Vickers DA; Baer T; Glasberg BR; Moore BCJ
Ear Hear; 2018; 39(1):20-31. PubMed ID: 28691934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. The preferred number of channels (one, two, or four) in NAL-NL1 prescribed wide dynamic range compression (WDRC) devices.
Keidser G; Grant F
Ear Hear; 2001 Dec; 22(6):516-27. PubMed ID: 11770673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Comparison of real-ear insertion gains in Japanese-speaking individuals wearing hearing aids with DSLv5 and NAL-NL2.
Furuki S; Sano H; Kurioka T; Ogiwara A; Nakagawa T; Inoue R; Umehara S; Hara Y; Suzuki K; Yamashita T
Auris Nasus Larynx; 2021 Feb; 48(1):75-81. PubMed ID: 32747167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. 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]
31. Self-Adjustment of Hearing Aid Amplification for Lower Speech Levels: Independent Ratings, Paired Comparisons, and Speech Recognition.
Perry TT; Nelson PB
Am J Audiol; 2022 Jun; 31(2):305-321. PubMed ID: 35316099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. 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]
33. Comparative analysis of the NAL-NL2 and DSL v5.0a prescription procedures in the adaptation of hearing aids in the elderly.
Bertozzo MC; Blasca WQ
Codas; 2019 Aug; 31(4):e20180171. PubMed ID: 31433039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Use of a loudness model for hearing-aid fitting. I. Linear hearing aids.
Moore BC; Glasberg BR
Br J Audiol; 1998 Oct; 32(5):317-35. PubMed ID: 9845030
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. 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]
36. [Effectiveness of hearing aid provision for severe hearing loss].
Engler M; Digeser F; Hoppe U
HNO; 2022 Jul; 70(7):520-532. PubMed ID: 35061063
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Evaluation of Hearing Aid Manufacturers' Software-Derived Fittings to DSL v5.0 Pediatric Targets.
Folkeard P; Bagatto M; Scollie S
J Am Acad Audiol; 2020 May; 31(5):354-362. PubMed ID: 31639078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. A Patient-Centered, Provider-Facilitated Approach to the Refinement of Nonlinear Frequency Compression Parameters Based on Subjective Preference Ratings of Amplified Sound Quality.
Johnson EE; Light KC
J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Sep; 26(8):689-702. PubMed ID: 26333877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Investigation of Extended Bandwidth Hearing Aid Amplification on Speech Intelligibility and Sound Quality in Adults with Mild-to-Moderate Hearing Loss.
Seeto A; Searchfield GD
J Am Acad Audiol; 2018 Mar; 29(3):243-254. PubMed ID: 29488874
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. 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]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
