145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38546852)
1. Functional outcomes for speech-in-noise intelligibility of NAL-NL2 and DSL v.5 prescriptive fitting rules in hearing aid users.
Portelli D; Loteta S; Ciodaro F; Salvago P; Galletti C; Freni L; Alberti G
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2024 Jun; 281(6):3227-3235. PubMed ID: 38546852
[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. Differences in Word and Phoneme Recognition in Quiet, Sentence Recognition in Noise, and Subjective Outcomes between Manufacturer First-Fit and Hearing Aids Programmed to NAL-NL2 Using Real-Ear Measures.
Valente M; Oeding K; Brockmeyer A; Smith S; Kallogjeri D
J Am Acad Audiol; 2018 Sep; 29(8):706-721. PubMed ID: 30222541
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Evaluation of real-world preferences and performance of hearing aids fitted according to the NAL-NL1 and DSL v5 procedures in children with moderately severe to profound hearing loss.
Quar TK; Ching TY; Newall P; Sharma M
Int J Audiol; 2013 May; 52(5):322-32. PubMed ID: 23570290
[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. 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]
11. [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]
12. Comparison of bimodal benefit for the use of DSL v5.0 and NAL-NL2 in cochlear implant listeners.
Digeser FM; Engler M; Hoppe U
Int J Audiol; 2020 May; 59(5):383-391. PubMed ID: 31809219
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. 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]
14. 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]
15. Comparing Two Hearing Aid Fitting Algorithms for Bimodal Cochlear Implant Users.
Vroegop JL; Homans NC; van der Schroeff MP; Goedegebure A
Ear Hear; 2019; 40(1):98-106. PubMed ID: 29782445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. 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]
18. Extended wear hearing aids: a comparative, pilot study.
Gazia F; Portelli D; Lo Vano M; Ciodaro F; Galletti B; Bruno R; Freni F; Alberti G; Galletti F
Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2022 Nov; 279(11):5415-5422. PubMed ID: 35767065
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. 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]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
