Speech mapping is a valuable tool for fitting and counseling patients

Hearing Journal

Volumn 59, Issue 8, 2006, Pages 26-30

  Moore, Brian C J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUDIOGRAPHY; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; HEARING AID; PATIENT COUNSELING; REVIEW; SPEECH;

EID: 33748303041     PISSN: 07457472     EISSN: 15425991     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.HJ.0000286371.07550.5b     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Moore BCJ, Glasberg BR: A comparison of four methods of implementing automatic gain control (AGC) in hearing aids. Brit J Audiol 1988;22:93-104.
2. Stone MA, Moore BCJ, Alcántara JI, Glasberg BR: Comparison of different forms of compression using wearable digital hearing aids. J Acoust Soc Am 1999;106: 3603-3619.
3. Villchur E: Signal processing to improve speech intelligibility in perceptive deafness. J Acoust Soc Am 1973;53:1646-1657.
4. Moore BCJ, Johnson JS, Clark TM, Pluvinage V: Evaluation of a dual-channel full dynamic range compression system for people with sensorineural hearing loss. Ear Hear 1992;13:349-370.
5. Cornelisse LE, Seewald RC, Jamieson DG: The input/output formula: A theoretical approach to the fitting of personal amplification devices. J Acoust Soc Am 1995;97:1854-1864.
6. Byrne D, Dillon H, Ching T, et al.: NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: Characteristics and comparisons with other procedures. JAAA 2001;12:37-51.
7. Moore BCJ, Glasberg BR, Stone MA: Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting. III. A general method for deriving initial fittings for hearing aids with multi-channel compression. Brit J Audiol 1999;33:241-258.
8. Moore BCJ: Use of a loudness model for hearing aid fitting. IV. Fitting hearing aids with multi-channel compression so as to restore “normal” loudness for speech at different levels. Brit J Audiol 2000;34:165-177.
9. Swan IR, Gatehouse S: The value of routine in-the-ear measurement of hearing aid gain. Brit J Audiol 1995;29:271-277.
10. Aarts NL, Caffee CS: Manufacturer predicted and measured REUR values in adult hearing aid fitting: Accuracy and clinical usefulness. IJA 2005;44:293-301.
11. Mueller HG, Hawkins DB, Northern JL: Probe Microphone Measurements: Hearing Aid Selection and Assessment. San Diego: Singular, 1992.
12. Stone, MA, Moore BCJ: Syllabic compression: Effective compression ratios for signals modulated at different rates. Brit J Audiol 1992;26:351-361.
13. Verschuure J, Maas AJJ, Stikvoort E, et al.: Compression and its effect on the speech signal. Ear Hear 1996;17:162-175.
14. Souza PE: Effects of compression on speech acoustics, intelligibility, and sound quality. Trends Amplif 2002;6:131-165.
15. Henning RW, Bentler R: Compression-dependent differences in hearing aid gain between speech and nonspeech input signals. Ear Hear 2005;26:409-422.
16. Jenstad LM, Souza PE: Quantifying the effect of compression hearing aid release time on speech acoustics and intelligibility. J Sp Lang Hear Res 2005;48:651-667.
17. Moore, BCJ. Stainsby TH, Alcántara JL, Kühnel V: The effect on speech intelligibility of varying compression time constants in a digital hearing aid. IJA 2004;43:399-409.
18. Cunningham DR, Laó-Dávila RG, Eisenmenger BA, Lazich RW: Study finds use of Live Speech Mapping reduces follow-up visits and saves money. Hear J 2002;55:43-46.