• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Comparison of three hearing aid fittings using the Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) Test.

作者信息

Surr R K, Fabry D A

机构信息

Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Army Audiology and Speech Center, Washington, DC.

出版信息

Ear Hear. 1991 Feb;12(1):32-8. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199102000-00004.

DOI:10.1097/00003446-199102000-00004
PMID:2026286
Abstract

This study compared the effects of three different hearing aids on subjective ratings of speech intelligibility. Insertion gain measurements on KEMAR indicated that the hearing aid fittings differed primarily in midfrequency gain. The test passages of the Speech Intelligibility Rating Test (SIR) were recorded onto tape through each hearing aid. The processed passages were presented monaurally to 13 subjects with hearing loss limited to frequencies above 2000 Hz. They rated five passages through each frequency responses (FR) in a randomized order. Each subject was retested within 2 or 3 days to assess test-retest reliability. Results indicated that the FR with the most midfrequency amplification did not differ significantly from the aid with the least amount of midfrequency gain. However, the FR with intermediate midfrequency gain received significantly lower ratings than did FR with most gain. Examination of the data from individual subjects indicated that the SIR results did not show differences among the FRs for the majority of subjects.

摘要

相似文献

1
Comparison of three hearing aid fittings using the Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) Test.
Ear Hear. 1991 Feb;12(1):32-8. doi: 10.1097/00003446-199102000-00004.
2
Evaluation of the speech intelligibility rating (SIR) test for hearing aid comparisons.用于助听器比较的言语清晰度评分(SIR)测试评估
J Speech Hear Res. 1992 Jun;35(3):686-93. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3503.686.
3
Comparison of in-the-ear and over-the-ear hearing aid fittings.
J Speech Hear Disord. 1986 Nov;51(4):362-9. doi: 10.1044/jshd.5104.362.
4
Development of the Speech Intelligibility Rating (SIR) test for hearing aid comparisons.用于助听器比较的言语可懂度评分(SIR)测试的开发。
J Speech Hear Res. 1989 Jun;32(2):347-52. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3202.347.
5
Preference judgments of artificial processed and hearing-aid transduced speech.人工处理语音和助听器转换语音的偏好判断
J Acoust Soc Am. 1999 Sep;106(3 Pt 1):1566-78. doi: 10.1121/1.428035.
6
Preferred insertion gain of hearing aids in listening and reading-aloud situations.助听器在听力和朗读情境中的优选插入增益。
J Speech Hear Res. 1990 Sep;33(3):520-9. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3303.520.
7
Optimization of frequency lowering algorithms for getting the highest speech intelligibility improvement by hearing loss simulation.通过听力损失模拟优化降频算法以获得最高的言语清晰度改善。
J Med Syst. 2015 Jun;39(6):64. doi: 10.1007/s10916-015-0248-9. Epub 2015 Apr 19.
8
Syllabic compression and speech intelligibility in hearing impaired listeners.
Scand Audiol Suppl. 1993;38:92-100.
9
Intelligibility ratings of continuous discourse: application to hearing aid selection.连续话语的可懂度评级:在助听器选择中的应用。
J Acoust Soc Am. 1984 Sep;76(3):758-66. doi: 10.1121/1.391299.
10
Reliability, sensitivity and validity of magnitude estimation, category scaling and paired-comparison judgements of speech intelligibility by older listeners.老年听众对言语可懂度进行量级估计、类别标度和配对比较判断的信度、敏感度及效度
Audiology. 1992;31(5):254-71.