Sound quality measures for speech in noise through a commercial hearing aid implementing "digital noise reduction"

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology

Volumn 16, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 270-277

  Ricketts, Todd A ^a   Hornsby, Benjamin W Y ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Digital noise reduction; Paired comparison; Sound quality

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; FEMALE; HEARING AID; HUMAN; MALE; NOISE MEASUREMENT; NOISE REDUCTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; SPEECH ANALYSIS; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEARING LOSS; INSTRUMENTATION; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; SIGNAL PROCESSING; SOUND; SPEECH AUDIOMETRY; SPEECH PERCEPTION; VOICE;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NOISE; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; SOUND; SPEECH PERCEPTION; SPEECH RECEPTION THRESHOLD TEST; VOICE QUALITY;

EID: 16244380075     PISSN: 10500545     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.16.5.2     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Alcantara J, Moore B, Kuhel V, Launer S. (2003) Evaluation of the noise reduction system in a commercial hearing aid. Int J Audiol 42:43-42.
2. Bentler RA. (2004) Advances in hearing aid technology. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Audiology, Salt Lake City, UT.
3. Benvenuto N, Cherubini G. (2002) The Wiener filter and linear prediction. In: Algorithms for Communications Systems and Their Applications. London: John Wiley, 89-172.
4. Boymans M, Dreschler WA. (2000) Field trials using a digital hearing aid with active noise reduction and dual-microphone directionality. Audiology 39:260-268.
5. Boymans M, Dreschler WA, Schoneveld P, Verschuure H. (1999) Clinical evaluation of a full-digital in-the-ear hearing instrument. Audiology 38:99-108.
6. Bray VH, Nilsson M. (2001) Additive SNR benefits of signal processing features in a directional hearing aid. Hear Rev 8:48-51, 62.
7. Bray V, Sandridge S, Newman C, Kornhass S. (2002) Clinical research findings confirm benefit of advanced signal processing. Audiology Online. http://www. audiologyonline.com
8. Cox R, Alexander G, Gilmore C. (1987) Development of the Connected Speech Test (CST). Ear Hear 8(Suppl.):119s-126s.
9. Cox R, Alexander G, Gilmore C, Pusakulich K. (1988) Use of the Connected Speech Test (CST) with hearing-impaired listeners. Ear Hear 9:198-207.
10. Dillon H. (1999) NAL-NL1: a new prescriptive fitting procedure for non-linear hearing aids. Hear J 52:10-17.
11. Pearsons KS, Bennett RL, Fidell S. (1977) Speech levels in various environments (EPA-600/1-77-025). Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency.
12. Powers TA, Holube I, Wesselkamp M. (1999) The use of digital features to combat background noise. In: Kochkin S, Strom KE, eds. High performance hearing solutions. Hear Rev 3(Suppl.):36-39.
13. Ricketts TA, Dahr S. (1999) Aided benefit across directional and omni-directional hearing aid microphones for behind-the-ear hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol 10:180-189.
14. Ricketts TA, Hornsby BWY, Johnson EE. (2005) Adaptive directional benefit in the near field: competing sound angle and level effects. Semin Hear 26(2):59-69.
15. Van Dijkhuizen JN, Festen JM, Plomp R. (1991) The effect of frequency-selective attenuation on the speech reception threshold of sentences in conditions of low-frequency noise. J Acoust Soc Am 90:885-894.
16. Walden BE, Surr RK, Cord MT, Edwards B, Olson L. (2000) Comparison of benefits provided by different hearing aid technologies. J Am Acad Audiol 11:540-560.