Literature DB >> 11214977

NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: characteristics and comparisons with other procedures.

D Byrne1, H Dillon, T Ching, R Katsch, G Keidser.   

Abstract

A new procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids (National Acoustic Laboratories' nonlinear fitting procedure, version 1 [NAL-NL1]) is described. The rationale is to maximize speech intelligibility while constraining loudness to be normal or less. Speech intelligibility is predicted by the Speech Intelligibility Index (SII), which has been modified to account for the reduction in performance associated with increasing degrees of hearing loss, especially at high frequencies. Prescriptions are compared for the NAL-NL1, desired sensation level [input/output], FIG6, and a threshold version of the Independent Hearing Aid Fitting Forum procedures. For an average speech input level, the NAL-NL1 prescriptions are very similar to those of the well-established NAL-Revised, Profound procedure. Compared with the other procedures, NAL-NL1 prescribes less low-frequency gain for flat and upward sloping audiograms. It prescribes less high-frequency gain for steeply sloping high-frequency hearing losses. NAL-NL1 tends to prescribe less compression than the other procedures. All procedures differ considerably from one another for some audiograms.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11214977

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol        ISSN: 1050-0545            Impact factor:   1.664


  79 in total

1.  Audiologist-driven versus patient-driven fine tuning of hearing instruments.

Authors:  Monique Boymans; Wouter A Dreschler
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2011-12-04

2.  The effects of selective consonant amplification on sentence recognition in noise by hearing-impaired listeners.

Authors:  Rithika Saripella; Philipos C Loizou; Linda Thibodeau; Jennifer A Alford
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  Reliability of categorical loudness scaling and its relation to threshold.

Authors:  Sarah C Al-Salim; Judy G Kopun; Stephen T Neely; Walt Jesteadt; Bettina Stiegemann; Michael P Gorga
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Effects of Removing Low-Frequency Electric Information on Speech Perception With Bimodal Hearing.

Authors:  Jennifer R Fowler; Jessica L Eggleston; Kelly M Reavis; Garnett P McMillan; Lina A J Reiss
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.297

5.  Initial development of a temporal-envelope-preserving nonlinear hearing aid prescription using a genetic algorithm.

Authors:  Andrew T Sabin; Pamela E Souza
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2013-06

6.  A comparison of NAL and DSL prescriptive methods for paediatric hearing-aid fitting: predicted speech intelligibility and loudness.

Authors:  Teresa Y C Ching; Earl E Johnson; Sanna Hou; Harvey Dillon; Vicky Zhang; Lauren Burns; Patricia van Buynder; Angela Wong; Christopher Flynn
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.117

7.  Factors affecting the benefits of high-frequency amplification.

Authors:  Amy R Horwitz; Jayne B Ahlstrom; Judy R Dubno
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Filtering to match hearing aid insertion gain to individual ear acoustics.

Authors:  Steven L Bell
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2009-08-26

9.  Influence of advanced hearing aid technology on choice of signal for probe microphone measures.

Authors:  J Groth
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2001-06

10.  The benefits of bimodal hearing: effect of frequency region and acoustic bandwidth.

Authors:  Sterling W Sheffield; René H Gifford
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2014-02-15       Impact factor: 1.854

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.