The Desired Sensation Level Multistage Input/Output Algorithm

Trends in Amplification

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 159-197

  Scollie, Susan ^a   Seewald, Richard ^a   Cornelisse, Leonard ^b   Moodie, Sheila ^a   Bagatto, Marlene ^a   Laurnagaray, Diana ^c   Beaulac, Steve ^a   Pumford, John ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b Unitron Hearing   (Canada)

^c Audiologia Integral   (Argentina)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHM; CONTROLLED STUDY; DESIRED SENSATION LEVEL METHOD; HEARING AID; HUMAN; LOUDNESS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; REVIEW; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; AUDIOMETRY, PURE-TONE; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS; HUMANS; INFANT; LOUDNESS PERCEPTION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSTHESIS FITTING; SPEECH PERCEPTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 31144479571     PISSN: 10847138     EISSN: 19405588     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/108471380500900403     Document Type: Article

References (110)

1. Alcántara JI Moore BC Marriage J. (2004). Comparison of three procedures for initial fitting of compression hearing aids II. Experienced users, fitted unilaterally Int J of Audiol 43: 3–14.
2. Allen P Bond CA. (1997). Multidimensional scaling of complex sounds by school-aged children and adults J Acoust Soc Am 102: 2255–2263.
3. Allen P Jones R Slaney P. (1998). The role of level, spectral, and temporal cues in children's detection of masked signals J Acoust Soc Am 104: 2997–3005.
4. Allen P Wightman FL. (1994). Psychometric functions for children's detection of tones in noise J Speech Hear Res 37: 205–215.
5. American Academy of Audiology (2004). Pediatric Amplification Protocol Audiol Today 16(2): 46–53.
6. American National Standards Institute (1996). American National Standard for Audiometers, ANSI S3.6–1996. New York: Acoustical Society of America.
7. American National Standards Institute (1997). Methods for calculation of the Speech Intelligibility Index, ANSI S3.5–1997. New York: Acoustical Society of America.
8. Bamford J McCracken W Peers I Grayson P. (1999). Trial of a two-channel hearing aid (low-frequency compression-high-frequency linear amplification) with school age children Ear Hear 20: 290–298.
9. Bagatto MP Moodie ST Scollie SD et al., (2005). Clinical Protocols for Pediatric Amplification, Trends Amplifi.
10. Bentler RA Pavlovic CV. (1989). Comparison of discomfort levels obtained with pure tones and multitone complexes J Acoust Soc Amer 86: 126–132.
11. Bentler RA Nelson JA. (2001). Effect of spectral shaping and content on loudness discomfort J Am Acad Audiol 12: 462–470.
12. Berger KW. (1980). Gain requirements of conductive hearing losses Br J Audiol 14: 137–141.
13. Blamey PJ Sarant JZ Paatsch LE et al., (2001). Relationships among speech perception, production, language, hearing loss, and age in children with impaired hearing J Speech Lang Hear Res 44: 264–285.
14. Boothroyd A. (1997). Auditory development of the hearing child Scand Audiol Suppl 46: 9–16.
15. Buus S Florentine M. (2002). Growth of loudness in listeners with cochlear hearing losses: recruitment reconsidered Assoc Res Otolaryngol. 3(2): 120–139.
16. Buus S Müsch H Florentine M. (1998). On loudness at threshold. J Acoust Soc Amer 104: 399–410.
17. Byrne D Dillon H Tran K et al., (1994). An international comparison of long-term average speech spectra. J Acoust Soc Am 96: 2108–2120.
18. Carlin WV Browning GG. (1990). Hearing disability and hearing aid benefit related to type of hearing impairment Clinical Otolaryngol Allied Sci 15: 53–57.
19. Ching T Newall P Wigney D. (1997). Comparison of severely and profoundly hearing impaired children's amplification preferences with the NAL-RP and the DSL 3.0 prescriptions Scand Audiol 26: 219–222.
20. Christensen LA. (1999). A comparison of three hearing-aid sound-processing strategies in a multiple-memory hearing aid for adolescents. Sem Hear 20: 183–195.
21. Cole WA Sinclair ST. (1998). The Audioscan RM500 Speechmap/DSL fitting system Trends Amplif 3: 125–139.
22. Condie RK Scollie SD Checkley PC. (2002). Children's performance: Analog vs. digital adaptive dual-microphone instruments. Hear Rev 9:40, 42-43-56.
23. Cornelisse LE Gagné JP Seewald RC. (1991). Ear level recordings of the long-term average spectrum of speech Ear Hear 12: 47–54.
24. Cornelisse LE Seewald RC Jamieson DG. (1995). The input/output (i/o) formula: A theoretical approach to the fitting of personal amplification devices. J Acoust Soc Am 97: 1854–1864.
25. Cox RM. (1985). A structured approach to hearing aid selection. Ear Hear 6: 226–239.
26. Cox RM Alexander GC Taylor IM Gray GA. (1997). The contour test of loudness perception Ear Hear 18: 388–400.
27. Cox RM Flamme GA. (1998). Accuracy of predicted ear canal speech levels using the VIOLA input/output-based fitting strategy Ear Hear 19: 139–148.
28. Cox RM Gray GA. (2001). Verifying loudness perception after hearing aid fitting Am J Audiol 10: 91–98.
29. Cox RM Mateisch JS Moore JN. (1988). Distribution of short-term RMS levels in conversational speech J Acoust Soc Am 84: 1100–1104.
30. Cox RM Moore JN. (1988). Composite speech spectrum for hearing aid gain prescriptions J Speech Hear Res 31: 102–107.
31. Dean MR McDermott HJ. (2000). Preferred listening levels: The effect of background noise for moderate-to-profoundly hearing impaired aid users Scand Audiol 29: 139–149.
32. Dermody PJ Byrne DJ. (1975). Auditory localisation by hearing-impaired persons using binaural in-the-ear hearing aids Br J Audiol 9: 93–101.
33. Dillon H. (1999). NAL-NL1: A new procedure for fitting non-linear hearing aids. Hear J 52: 10–16.
34. Dillon H. (2001). Hearing Aids. New York: Thieme.
35. Dillon H James A Ginis J. (1997). Client Oriented Scale of Improvement (COSI) and its relationship to several other measures of benefit and satisfaction provided by hearing aids J Am Acad Audiol 8: 27–43.
36. Dillon H Storey L. (1998). The National Acoustic Laboratories’ Procedure for selecting the saturation sound pressure level of hearing aids: Theoretical derivation Ear Hear 19: 255–266.
37. Dunn HK White SD. (1940). Statistical measurements on conversational speech J Acoust Soc Am 11:27.
38. Elliot LL Connors S Kille E et al., (1979). Children's understanding of monosyllabic nouns in quiet and in noise. J Acoust Soc Am 66: 12–21.
39. Elliot LL Katz D. (1980). Children's pure tone detection. J Acoust Soc Am 67: 343–344.
40. Fallon M Trehub SE Schneider BA. (2002). Children's use of semantic cues in degraded listening environment. J Acoust Soc Am 111: 2242–2249.
41. Gatehouse S. (1993). Role of perceptual acclimatization in the selection of frequency responses for hearing aids J Am Acad Audiol 4: 296–306.
42. Gatehouse S Browning GG. (1982). A re-examination of the Carhart effect. Br J Audiol 16: 215–220.
43. Gitles TC Niquette PT. (1995). FIG6 In Ten. Hear Rev 2: 28–30.
44. Gravel JS Fausel N Liskow C Chobot J. (1999). Children's speech recognition in noise using omni-directional and dual-microphone hearing aid technology. Ear Hear 20: 1–11.
45. Haggard MP Hall JW. (1982). Forms of binaural summation and the implications of individual variability for binaural hearing aids Scand Audiol Suppl 15: 47–63.
46. Hall JW Harvey ADG. (1985). Diotic loudness summation in normal and impaired hearing J Speech Hear Res 28: 445–448.
47. Hanin L. (1999). Amplification considerations for the young infant with hearing loss Sem Hear 20: 175–181.
48. Hawkins DB Montgomery AA Prosek RA Walden BE. (1987). Examination of two issues concerning functional gain measurements J Speech Hear Res 52: 56–63.
49. Hnath-Chisolm TE Laipply E Boothroyd A. (1998). Age-related changes on a children's test of sensory-level speech perception capacity. J Speech Lang Hear Res 41: 94–106.
50. Hornsby BW Ricketts TA. (2003). The effects of hearing loss on the contribution of high- and low-frequency speech information to speech understanding J Acoust Soc Am 113: 1706–1717.
51. Humes LE. (1999). Dimensions of hearing aid outcome J Am Acad Audiol 10: 26–39.
52. Jenstad LM Cornelisse LE Seewald RC. (1997). Effect of stimulus context on individual loudness functions Ear Hear 18(5): 401–408.
53. Jenstad LM Seewald RC Cornelisse LE Shantz J. (1999). Comparison of linear gain and wide dynamic range compression hearing aid circuits: Aided speech perception measures Ear Hear 20: 117–126.
54. Jenstad LM Pumford J Seewald RC Cornelisse LE. (2000). Comparison of linear gain and wide dynamic range compression hearing aid circuits: Aided loudness measures Ear Hear 21: 32–44.
55. Keidser G Grant F. (2001). Comparing loudness normalization (IHAFF) with speech intelligibility maximization (NAL-NL1) when implemented in a two-channel device Ear Hear 22: 501–515.
56. Killion MC. (1997). The SIN report: Circuits haven't solved the hearing-in-noise problem Hear J 50: 28–32.
57. Killion MC Villchur E. (1993). Kessler was right- partly: But SIN test shows some aids improve hearing in noise Hear J 46: 31–35.
58. Kortekaas RW Stelmachowicz PG. (2000). Bandwidth effects on children's perception of the inflectional morpheme /s/: Acoustical measurements, auditory detection, and clarity rating J Speech Lang Hear Res 43: 645–660.
59. Launer S. (1995). Loudness perception in listeners with sensorineural hearing impairment. Ph.D Thesis. Oldenburg University, Oldenburg, Germany.
60. Lear S Toe D Rickards F Seewald RC. (1999). Effect of output limiting levels upon the speech perception skills of congenitally hearing impaired adolescents Sem Hear 20: 237–250.
61. Lindley G Palmer C. (1997). Fitting wide dynamic range compression hearing aids: DSL[i/o], the IHAFF protocol, and FIG6 Am J Audiol 6: 19–28.
62. Liu TC Chen YS. (2000). Loudness discomfort levels in patients with conductive and mixed hearing loss Auris Nasus Larynx 27: 101–104.
63. Moeller MP Donaghy KF Beauchaine KL et al., (1996). Longitudinal study of FM system use in nonacademic settings: Effects on language development Ear Hear 17: 28–41.
64. Moore BCJ Alcántara JI Marriage JE. (2001). Comparison of three procedures for initial fitting of compression hearing aids: 1 Experienced users, fitted bilaterally. Br J Audiol 35: 339–353.
65. Moore BC. (2004). Testing the concept of softness imperception: loudness near threshold for hearing-impaired ears J Acoust Soc Am. 115(6): 3103–11.
66. Munro KJ Lutman ME. (2003). The effect of speech presentation level on measurement of auditory acclimatization to amplified speech J Acoust Soc Am 114: 484–495.
67. Munro KJ Patel RK. (1998). Are clinical measurements of uncomfortable loudness levels a valid indicator of real-world auditory discomfort? Br J Audiol 32: 287–293.
68. Nabelek AK Robinson PK. (1982). Monaural and binaural speech perception in reverberation for listeners of various ages J Acoust Soc Am 71: 1242–1248.
69. Neuman AC Hochberg I. (1982). The effect of reverberation on the phoneme discrimination of children. Paper presented at the 1982 ASHA Convention. Toronto, ON. Ref Type: Generic
70. Nilsson M Soli SD Sullivan JA. (1994). Development of the Hearing in Noise Test for the measurement of speech reception thresholds in quiet and in noise J Acoust Soc Am 95: 1085–1099.
71. Nittrouer S. (2002). Learning to perceive speech: How fricative perception changes, and how it stays the same J Acoust Soc Am 112: 711–719.
72. Nittrouer S Boothroyd A. (1990). Context effects in phoneme and word recognition by younger children and older adults J Acoust Soc Am 87: 2705–2715.
73. Nozza RJ. (1987). Infant speech-sound discrimination testing: Effects of stimulus intensity and procedural model on measures of performance J Acoust Soc Am 81: 1928–1939.
74. Nozza RJ Miller SL Rossman RN Bond LC. (1991). Reliability and validity of infant speech-sound discrimination-in-noise thresholds J Speech Hear Res 34: 643–650.
75. Nozza RJ Rossman RN Bond LC. (1991). Infant-adult differences in unmasked thresholds for the discrimination of consonant-vowel syllable pairs Audiol 30: 102–112.
76. Nozza RJ Rossman RN Bond LC Miller SL. (1990). Infant speech-sound discrimination in noise J Acoust Soc Am 87: 339–350.
77. Olsen WA. (1998). Average speech levels and spectra in various speaking/listening conditions: A summary of the Pearson, Bennett, and Fidell (1977) report. Am J Audiol 7: 1–5.
78. Parsons JO Clark CR. (2002). Comparison of an ‘intutive’ NHS hearing aid prescription method with DSL 4.1 targets for amplification Int J Audiol. 41(6): 357–362.
79. Pavlovic CV. (1987). Derivation of primary parameters and procedures for use in speech intelligibility predictions J Acoust Soc Am 82: 413–422.
80. Pearsons K Bennett R Fidell S. (1977). Speech levels in various noise environments. Project report on contract 68 01-2466. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
81. Pittman AL Stelmachowicz PG. (2000). Perception of voiceless fricatives by normal-hearing and hearing-impaired children and adults J Speech Lang Hear Res 43: 1389–1401.
82. Pittman AL Stelmachowicz PG. (2003). Hearing loss in children and adults: Audiometric configuration, asymmetry, and progression Ear Hear 24: 198–205.
83. Scollie SD. (in review). Children's speech recognition scores: The SII and proficiency factors for age and hearing level. Ear Hear.
84. Scollie SD Seewald R Cole W et al., (2001). Comparison of two methods to generate SII values from clinical measures of frequency response. Paper presented at the International Hearing Aid Research Conference, Lake Tahoe, CA.
85. Scollie SD. (2005). Prescriptive procedures for infants and children. In: Seewald R Bamford J. eds. A Sound Foundation Through Early Amplification 2004: Proceedings of the Third International Conference. Stäfa, Switzerland: Phonak AG, 91–104.
86. Scollie SD Seewald RC. (2002). Predicting aided levels of speech from clinical test signals Ear Hear 23: 477–487.
87. Scollie SD Seewald RC Moodie KS Dekok K. (2000). Preferred listening levels of children who use hearing aids: Comparison to prescriptive targets J Am Acad Audiol 11: 230–238.
88. Seewald RC Cornelisse LE Ramji KV et al., (1997). DSL v4.1 for Windows: A software implementation of the Desired Sensation Level (DSL[i/o]) Method for fitting linear gain and wide-dynamic-range compression hearing instruments. Users’ manual. London, ON: University of Western Ontario Hearing Health Care Research Unit.
89. Seewald RC Moodie ST Scollie SD et al., (2005). The DSL Method for pediatric hearing instrument fitting: Historical perspective and current issues. Trends Amplif.
90. Seewald RC Moodie KS Sinclair ST et al., (1999). Predictive validity of a procedure for pediatric hearing aid fitting Am J Audiol 8: 143–152.
91. Seewald RC Ramji KV Sinclair ST et al., (1993). Computer-assisted implementation of the desired sensation level method for electroacoustic selection and fitting in children: Version 3.1, User's manual. London, ON: The University of Western Ontario.
92. Serpanos YC Gravel JS. (2000). Assessing growth of loudness in children by cross-modality matching (CMM) J Am Acad Audiol 11: 190–202.
93. Skinner MW Miller JD. (1983). Amplification bandwidth and intelligibility of speech in quiet and noise for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss Audiology 22(3): 253–279.
94. Smeds K. (2004). Is normal or less than normal overall loudness preferred by first-time hearing aid users? Ear Hear 25: 159–172.
95. Snik AF Hombergen GC. (1993). Hearing aid fitting of preschool and primary school children An evaluation using the insertion gain measurement. Scand Audiol 22: 245–250.
96. Snik AF Stollman MH. (1995). Measured and calculated insertion gains in young children Br J Audiol 29(1): 7–11.
97. Snik AF van den Borne S Brokx JP et al., (1995). Hearing aid fitting in profoundly hearing-impaired children: Comparison of prescription rules Scand Audiol 24(4): 225–230.
98. Stapells DR. (2000). Frequency-specific evoked potential audiometry in infants. In: Seewald RC. ed. A Sound Foundation through Early Amplification: Proceedings of an International Conference. Stäfa, Switzerland: Phonak AG, 13–32.
99. Stapells DR Picton TW Durieux-Smith A et al., (1990). Thresholds for short-latency auditory-evoked potentials to tones in notched noise in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired subjects Audiol 29: 262–274.
100. Stelmachowicz PG Hoover BM Lewis DE et al., (2000). The relationship between stimulus context, speech audibility, and perception for normal- and hearing-impaired children J Speech Lang Hear Res 43: 902–914.
101. Stelmachowicz PG Pittman AL Hoover BM et al., (2001). Effect of stimulus bandwidth on the perception of /s/ in normal- and hearing-impaired children and adults J Acoust Soc America 110: 2183–2190.
102. Stelmachowicz PG Pittman AL Hoover BM et al., (2002). Aided perception of /s/ and /z/ by hearing-impaired children Ear Hear 23:324.
103. Stelmachowicz PG Pittman AL Hoover BM et al., (2004). The importance of high-frequency audibility in the speech and language development of children with hearing loss Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 130: 556–562.
104. The Pediatric Working Group (1996). Amplification for infants and children with hearing loss: Am J Audiol 5: 53–68.
105. Turner CW Humes LE Bentler RA Cox RM. (1996). A review of past research on changes in hearing aid benefit over time. Ear Hear 17: 14S–25S.
106. Villchur E. (1993). A different approach to the noise problem of the hearing impaired. Am J Audiol 2: 47–51.
107. Walker G. (1997a). Conductive hearing impairment: The relationship between hearing loss, MCLs and LDLs Australian J Audiol 19: 71–80.
108. Walker G. (1997b). The preferred speech spectrum of people with normal hearing and its relevance to hearing aid fitting Australian J Audiol 19: 1–8.
109. Walker G. (1998). Frequency response selection for people with mixed hearing loss: Preferred and predicted responses Australian J Audiol 20: 55–66.
110. Wightman FL Allen P. (1992). Individual differences in auditory capability among preschool children. In: Werner LA Rubel EW. eds. Developmental Psychoacoustics. Washington DC: American Psychological Association, 113–133.