Perceptual Benefits of Extended Bandwidth Hearing Aids With Children: A Within-Subject Design Using Clinically Available Hearing Aids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The aim of the study was to investigate the achieved audibility with clinically available, modern, high-end, behind-the-ear hearing aids fitted using the Desired Sensation Level v5.0 child prescription for a clinical sample of children with hearing impairment and the effect of the extended bandwidth provided by the hearing aids on several outcome measures. Method The achieved audibility was measured using the maximum audible output frequency method. Twenty-eight children (7–17 years old) with mild to severe hearing losses completed this study. Two hearing aid conditions were fitted for each participant: an extended bandwidth condition, which was fitted to targets as closely as possible, and a restricted bandwidth condition, for which aided output was restricted above 4.5 kHz. Consonant discrimination in noise, subjective preference, aided loudness growth, and preferred listening levels were evaluated in both conditions. Results The extended bandwidth hearing aid fittings provided speech audibility above 4.5 kHz for all children, with an average maximum audible output frequency of 7376 Hz (SD= 1669 Hz). When compared to a restricted bandwidth, the extended bandwidth condition led to an improvement of 5.4% for consonant discrimination in noise scores, mostly attributable to /s/, /z/, and /t/ phoneme perception. Aided loudness results and preferred listening levels were not significantly different across bandwidth conditions; however, 65% of the children indicated a subjective preference for the extended bandwidth. Conclusion The study suggests that providing the full bandwidth available, with modern, behind-the-ear hearing aids, leads to improved audibility, when compared to restricted bandwidth hearing aids, and that it leads to beneficial outcomes for children who use hearing aids, fitted to the Desired Sensation Level v5.0 child prescription, without causing significant increases in their loudness perception.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".