These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
3. Evaluation of the CAMEQ2-HF method for fitting hearing aids with multichannel amplitude compression. Moore BC, Füllgrabe C. Ear Hear; 2010 Oct; 31(5):657-66. PubMed ID: 20526199 [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 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Effects of bandwidth, compression speed, and gain at high frequencies on preferences for amplified music. Moore BC. Trends Amplif; 2012 Sep; 16(3):159-72. PubMed ID: 23172008 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. 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 Sep; 22(7):441-59. PubMed ID: 21993050 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Musician and Nonmusician Hearing Aid Setting Preferences for Music and Speech Stimuli. D'Onofrio KL, Gifford RH, Ricketts TA. Am J Audiol; 2019 Jun 10; 28(2):333-347. PubMed ID: 31091118 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Comparison of the CAM2A and NAL-NL2 hearing-aid fitting methods for participants with a wide range of hearing losses. Moore BC, Sęk A. Int J Audiol; 2016 Jun 10; 55(2):93-100. PubMed ID: 26470732 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Music preferences with hearing aids: effects of signal properties, compression settings, and listener characteristics. Croghan NB, Arehart KH, Kates JM. Ear Hear; 2014 Jun 10; 35(5):e170-84. PubMed ID: 25010635 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Speech intelligibility benefits of hearing AIDS at various input levels. Kuk F, Lau CC, Korhonen P, Crose B. J Am Acad Audiol; 2015 Mar 10; 26(3):275-88. PubMed ID: 25751695 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Paired comparisons of nonlinear frequency compression, extended bandwidth, and restricted bandwidth hearing aid processing for children and adults with hearing loss. Brennan MA, McCreery R, Kopun J, Hoover B, Alexander J, Lewis D, Stelmachowicz PG. J Am Acad Audiol; 2014 Mar 10; 25(10):983-98. PubMed ID: 25514451 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Preferred listening levels for linear and slow-acting compression hearing aids. Neuman AC, Bakke MH, Hellman S, Levitt H. Ear Hear; 1995 Aug 10; 16(4):407-16. PubMed ID: 8549896 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Speech recognition performance of patients with sensorineural hearing loss under unaided and aided conditions using linear and compression hearing AIDS. Shanks JE, Wilson RH, Larson V, Williams D. Ear Hear; 2002 Aug 10; 23(4):280-90. PubMed ID: 12195170 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. Effects of fast-acting high-frequency compression on the intelligibility of speech in steady and fluctuating background sounds. Stone MA, Moore BC, Wojtczak M, Gudgin E. Br J Audiol; 1997 Aug 10; 31(4):257-73. PubMed ID: 9307821 [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]