207 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24253361)
1. Modern prescription theory and application: realistic expectations for speech recognition with hearing AIDS.
Johnson EE
Trends Amplif; 2013; 17(3):143-70. PubMed ID: 24253361
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. 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]
4. A comparison of NAL and DSL prescriptive methods for paediatric hearing-aid fitting: predicted speech intelligibility and loudness.
Ching TY; Johnson EE; Hou S; Dillon H; Zhang V; Burns L; van Buynder P; Wong A; Flynn C
Int J Audiol; 2013 Dec; 52 Suppl 2(0 2):S29-38. PubMed ID: 24350692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. Hearing aid fitting and developmental outcomes of children fit according to either the NAL or DSL prescription: fit-to-target, audibility, speech and language abilities.
Ching TYC; Zhang VW; Johnson EE; Van Buynder P; Hou S; Burns L; Button L; Flynn C; McGhie K
Int J Audiol; 2018 May; 57(sup2):S41-S54. PubMed ID: 28971727
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Effects of Modified Hearing Aid Fittings on Loudness and Tone Quality for Different Acoustic Scenes.
Moore BC; Baer T; Ives DT; Marriage J; Salorio-Corbetto M
Ear Hear; 2016; 37(4):483-91. PubMed ID: 26928003
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. 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]
10. 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]
11. A comparison of threshold-based fitting strategies for nonlinear hearing aids.
Stelmachowicz PG; Dalzell S; Peterson D; Kopun J; Lewis DL; Hoover BE
Ear Hear; 1998 Apr; 19(2):131-8. PubMed ID: 9562535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. NAL-NL2 Prescriptive Targets for Bone Conduction Devices With an Adaptation to Device Constraints in the Low Frequencies.
Toll M; Dingemanse G
Ear Hear; 2022 Nov-Dec 01; 43(6):1721-1729. PubMed ID: 35622973
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. 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]
15. 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]
16. Comparison of the CAM2 and NAL-NL2 hearing aid fitting methods.
Moore BC; Sęk A
Ear Hear; 2013; 34(1):83-95. PubMed ID: 22878351
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Fitting hearing aids to individual loudness-perception measures.
Ricketts TA
Ear Hear; 1996 Apr; 17(2):124-32. PubMed ID: 8698159
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [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]
19. 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]
20. Cortical auditory-evoked potentials (CAEPs) in adults in response to filtered speech stimuli.
Carter L; Dillon H; Seymour J; Seeto M; Van Dun B
J Am Acad Audiol; 2013 Oct; 24(9):807-22. PubMed ID: 24224988
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
