Literature DB >> 16424945

The Desired Sensation Level multistage input/output algorithm.

Susan Scollie1, Richard Seewald, Leonard Cornelisse, Sheila Moodie, Marlene Bagatto, Diana Laurnagaray, Steve Beaulac, John Pumford.   

Abstract

The Desired Sensation Level (DSL) Method was revised to support hearing instrument fitting for infants, young children, and adults who use modern hearing instrument technologies, including multichannel compression, expansion, and multimemory capability. The aims of this revision are to maintain aspects of the previous versions of the DSL Method that have been supported by research, while extending the method to account for adult-child differences in preference and listening requirements. The goals of this version (5.0) include avoiding loudness discomfort, selecting a frequency response that meets audibility requirements, choosing compression characteristics that appropriately match technology to the user's needs, and accommodating the overall prescription to meet individual needs for use in various listening environments. This review summarizes the status of research on the use of the DSL Method with pediatric and adult populations and presents a series of revisions that have been made during the generation of DSL v5.0. This article concludes with case examples that illustrate key differences between the DSL v4.1 and DSL v5.0 prescriptions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16424945      PMCID: PMC4111494          DOI: 10.1177/108471380500900403

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trends Amplif        ISSN: 1084-7138


  80 in total

1.  The input/output formula: a theoretical approach to the fitting of personal amplification devices.

Authors:  L E Cornelisse; R C Seewald; D G Jamieson
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Age-related changes on a children's test of sensory-level speech perception capacity.

Authors:  T E Hnath-Chisolm; E Laipply; A Boothroyd
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 2.297

3.  A review of past research on changes in hearing aid benefit over time.

Authors:  C W Turner; L E Humes; R A Bentler; R M Cox
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Accuracy of predicted ear canal speech levels using the VIOLA input/output-based fitting strategy.

Authors:  R M Cox; G A Flamme
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 3.570

5.  Derivation of primary parameters and procedures for use in speech intelligibility predictions.

Authors:  C V Pavlovic
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Forms of binaural summation and the implications of individual variability for binaural hearing aids.

Authors:  M P Haggard; J W Hall
Journal:  Scand Audiol Suppl       Date:  1982

7.  A structured approach to hearing aid selection.

Authors:  R M Cox
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1985 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

Review 8.  The DSL method for pediatric hearing instrument fitting: historical perspective and current issues.

Authors:  Richard Seewald; Sheila Moodie; Susan Scollie; Marlene Bagatto
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2005

9.  Children's understanding of monosyllabic nouns in quiet and in noise.

Authors:  L L Elliott; S Connors; E Kille; S Levin; K Ball; D Katz
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1979-07       Impact factor: 1.840

10.  Comparison of an 'intuitive' NHS hearing aid prescription method with DSL 4.1 targets for amplification.

Authors:  Jonathan O Parsons; Charles R Clark
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.117

View more
  104 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 influence of hearing-aid compression on forward-masked thresholds for adults with hearing loss.

Authors:  Marc A Brennan; Ryan W McCreery; Walt Jesteadt
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 1.840

3.  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

4.  Evaluation of hearing aid frequency response fittings in pediatric and young adult bimodal recipients.

Authors:  Lisa S Davidson; Jill B Firszt; Chris Brenner; Jamie H Cadieux
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 1.664

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.  An analysis of hearing aid fittings in adults using cochlear implants and contralateral hearing aids.

Authors:  Michael S Harris; Marcia Hay-McCutcheon
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.325

8.  Influence of hearing loss on children's identification of spondee words in a speech-shaped noise or a two-talker masker.

Authors:  Lori J Leibold; Andrea Hillock-Dunn; Nicole Duncan; Patricia A Roush; Emily Buss
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 3.570

9.  Effects of digital noise reduction on speech perception for children with hearing loss.

Authors:  Patricia Stelmachowicz; Dawna Lewis; Brenda Hoover; Kanae Nishi; Ryan McCreery; William Woods
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.570

10.  Two ears and two (or more?) devices: a pediatric case study of bilateral profound hearing loss.

Authors:  Rosalie M Uchanski; Lisa S Davidson; Sharon Quadrizius; Ruth Reeder; Jamie Cadieux; Jerrica Kettel; Richard A Chole
Journal:  Trends Amplif       Date:  2009-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.