Masked speech recognition by 6-13-year-olds with early-childhood otitis media: effects of acoustic condition and otologic history.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate speech recognition in school-age children with early-childhood otitis media (OM) in conditions with noise or speech maskers with or without interaural differences. To also investigate the effects of three otologic history factors. DESIGN: Using headphone presentation, speech recognition thresholds (SRTs) were measured with simple sentences. As maskers, stationary speech-shaped noise (SSN) or two-talker running speech (TTS) were used. The stimuli were presented in a monaural and binaural condition (SSN) or a co-located and spatially separated condition (TTS). Based on the available medical records, overall OM duration, OM onset age, and time since the last OM episode were estimated. STUDY SAMPLE: 6-13-year-olds with a history of recurrent OM (N = 42) or without any ear diseases (N = 20) with normal tympanograms and audiograms at the time of testing. RESULTS: Mixed-model regression analyses that controlled for age showed poorer SRTs for the OM group (Δ-value = 0.84 dB, p = 0.009). These appeared driven by the spatially separated, binaural, and monaural conditions. The OM group showed large inter-individual differences, which were unrelated to the otologic history factors. CONCLUSIONS: Early-childhood OM can affect speech recognition in different acoustic conditions. The effects of the otologic history warrant further investigation.

Speech Comprehension by Cochlear Implant Users Assessed with Evoked Potentials and Response Times.

INTRODUCTION: Cochlear implant (CI) users differ greatly in their rehabilitation outcomes, including speech understanding in noise. This variability may be related to brain changes associated with intact senses recruiting cortical areas from stimulation-deprived senses. Numerous studies have demonstrated such cross-modal reorganization in individuals with untreated hearing loss. How it is affected by regular use of hearing devices remains unclear, however. To shed light on this, the current study measured cortical responses reflecting comprehension abilities in experienced CI users and normal-hearing controls. METHODS: Using multichannel electroencephalography, we tested CI users who had used their devices for at least 12 months and closely matched controls (N = 2 × 13). Cortical responses reflecting comprehension abilities - the N400 and late positive complex (LPC) components - were evoked using congruent and incongruent digit-triplet stimuli. The participants' task was to assess digit-triplet congruency by means of timed button presses. All measurements were performed in speech-shaped noise 15 dB above individually measured speech recognition thresholds. Three stimulus presentation modes were used: auditory-only, visual-only, and visual-then-auditory. RESULTS: The analyses revealed no group differences in the N400 and LPC responses. In terms of response times, the CI users were slower and differentially affected by the three stimulus presentation modes relative to the controls. CONCLUSION: Compared to normal-hearing controls, experienced CI users may need more time to comprehend speech in noise. Response times can serve as a proxy for speech comprehension by CI users.

Focusing on Positive Listening Experiences Improves Speech Intelligibility in Experienced Hearing Aid Users.

Negativity bias is a cognitive bias that results in negative events being perceptually more salient than positive ones. For hearing care, this means that hearing aid benefits can potentially be overshadowed by adverse experiences. Research has shown that sustaining focus on positive experiences has the potential to mitigate negativity bias. The purpose of the current study was to investigate whether a positive focus (PF) intervention can improve speech-in-noise abilities for experienced hearing aid users. Thirty participants were randomly allocated to a control or PF group (N = 2 × 15). Prior to hearing aid fitting, all participants filled out the short form of the Speech, Spatial and Qualities of Hearing scale (SSQ12) based on their own hearing aids. At the first visit, they were fitted with study hearing aids, and speech-in-noise testing was performed. Both groups then wore the study hearing aids for two weeks and sent daily text messages reporting hours of hearing aid use to an experimenter. In addition, the PF group was instructed to focus on positive listening experiences and to also report them in the daily text messages. After the 2-week trial, all participants filled out the SSQ12 questionnaire based on the study hearing aids and completed the speech-in-noise testing again. Speech-in-noise performance and SSQ12 Qualities score were improved for the PF group but not for the control group. This finding indicates that the PF intervention can improve subjective and objective hearing aid benefits.

Auditory Profile-Based Hearing Aid Fitting: Self-Reported Benefit for First-Time Hearing Aid Users.

Background: Although hearing aids (HAs) can compensate for reduced audibility, functional outcomes and benefits vary widely across individuals. As part of the Danish 'Better hEAring Rehabilitation' (BEAR) project, four distinct auditory profiles differing in terms of audiometric thresholds and supra-threshold hearing abilities were recently identified. Additionally, profile-specific HA-fitting strategies were proposed. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the self-reported benefit of these profile-based HA fittings in a group of new HA users. Methods: A total of 205 hearing-impaired older adults were recruited from two Danish university hospitals. Participants were randomly allocated to one of two treatment groups: (1) NAL-NL2 gain prescription combined with default advanced feature settings ('reference fitting') or (2) auditory profile-based fitting with tailored gain prescription and advanced feature settings ('BEAR fitting'). Two months after treatment, the participants completed the benefit version of the short form of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12-B) and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) questionnaire. Results: Overall, participants reported a clear benefit from HA treatment. However, no significant differences in the SSQ12-B or IOI-HA scores between the reference and BEAR fittings were found. Conclusion: First-time users experience clear benefits from HA treatment. Auditory profile-based HA fitting warrants further investigation.

Amplitude Compression for Preventing Rollover at Above-Conversational Speech Levels.

Hearing aids provide nonlinear amplification to improve speech audibility and loudness perception. While more audibility typically increases speech intelligibility at low levels, the same is not true for above-conversational levels, where decreases in intelligibility ("rollover") can occur. In a previous study, we found rollover in speech intelligibility measurements made in quiet for 35 out of 74 test ears with a hearing loss. Furthermore, we found rollover occurrence in quiet to be associated with poorer speech intelligibility in noise as measured with linear amplification. Here, we retested 16 participants with rollover with three amplitude-compression settings. Two were designed to prevent rollover by applying slow- or fast-acting compression with a 5:1 compression ratio around the "sweet spot," that is, the area in an individual performance-intensity function with high intelligibility and listening comfort. The third, reference setting used gains and compression ratios prescribed by the "National Acoustic Laboratories Non-Linear 1" rule. Speech intelligibility was assessed in quiet and in noise. Pairwise preference judgments were also collected. For speech levels of 70 dB SPL and above, slow-acting sweet-spot compression gave better intelligibility in quiet and noise than the reference setting. Additionally, the participants clearly preferred slow-acting sweet-spot compression over the other settings. At lower levels, the three settings gave comparable speech intelligibility, and the participants preferred the reference setting over both sweet-spot settings. Overall, these results suggest that, for listeners with rollover, slow-acting sweet-spot compression is beneficial at 70 dB SPL and above, while at lower levels clinically established gain targets are more suited.

A history of occupational noise exposure is associated with steep-slope audiograms and poorer self-reported hearing-aid outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of previous occupational noise exposure in older adults with hearing loss on (1) audiometric configuration and acoustic reflex (AR) thresholds and (2) self-reported hearing abilities and hearing aid (HA) effectiveness. DESIGN: A prospective observational study. STUDY SAMPLE: The study included 1176 adults (≥60 years) with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Pure-tone audiometry, AR thresholds, and responses to the abbreviated version of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ12) and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) questionnaire were obtained, along with information about previous occupational noise exposure. RESULTS: Greater occupational noise exposure was associated with a higher prevalence of steeply sloping audiograms in men and women and a 0.32 (95% CI: -0.57; -0.06) scale points lower mean SSQ12 total score among noise-exposed men. AR thresholds did not show a significant relation to noise-exposure status, but hearing thresholds at a given frequency were related to elevated AR thresholds at the same frequency. CONCLUSIONS: A noise exposure history is linked to steeper audiograms in older adults with hearing loss as well as to poorer self-reported hearing abilities in noise-exposed men. More attention to older adults with previous noise exposure is warranted in hearing rehabilitation.

Does experience with hearing aid amplification influence electrophysiological measures of speech comprehension?

OBJECTIVE: To explore if experience with hearing aid (HA) amplification affects speech-evoked cortical potentials reflecting comprehension abilities. DESIGN: N400 and late positive complex (LPC) responses as well as behavioural response times to congruent and incongruent digit triplets were measured. The digits were presented against stationary speech-shaped noise 10 dB above individually measured speech recognition thresholds. Stimulus presentation was either acoustic (digits 1-3) or first visual (digits 1-2) and then acoustic (digit 3). STUDY SAMPLE: Three groups of older participants (N = 3 × 15) with (1) pure-tone average hearing thresholds <25 dB HL from 500-4000 Hz, (2) mild-to-moderate sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) but no prior HA experience, and (3) mild-to-moderate SNHL and >2 years of HA experience. Groups 2-3 were fitted with test devices in accordance with clinical gain targets. RESULTS: No group differences were found in the electrophysiological data. N400 amplitudes were larger and LPC latencies shorter with acoustic presentation. For group 1, behavioural response times were shorter with visual-then-acoustic presentation. CONCLUSION: When speech audibility is ensured, comprehension-related electrophysiological responses appear intact in individuals with mild-to-moderate SNHL, regardless of prior experience with amplified sound. Further research into the effects of audibility versus acclimatisation-related neurophysiological changes is warranted.

Impact of hearing aid technology level at first-fit on self-reported outcomes in patients with presbycusis: a randomized controlled trial.

To provide clinical guidance in hearing aid prescription for older adults with presbycusis, we investigated differences in self-reported hearing abilities and hearing aid effectiveness for premium or basic hearing aid users. Secondly, as an explorative analysis, we investigated if differences in gain prescription verified with real-ear measurements explain differences in self-reported outcomes. The study was designed as a randomized controlled trial in which the patients were blinded towards the purpose of the study. In total, 190 first-time hearing aid users (>60 years of age) with symmetric bilateral presbycusis were fitted with either a premium or basic hearing aid. The randomization was stratified on age, sex, and word recognition score. Two outcome questionnaires were distributed: the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA) and the short form of the Speech, Spatial, and Qualities of Hearing Scale (SSQ-12). In addition, insertion gains were calculated from real-ear measurements at first-fit for all fitted hearing aids. Premium hearing aid users reported 0.7 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.1) scale points higher total SSQ-12 score per item and 0.8 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.4) scale points higher speech score per item, as well as 0.6 (95%CI: 0.2; 1.1) scale points higher qualities score compared to basic-feature hearing aid users. No significant differences in reported hearing aid effectiveness were found using the IOI-HA. Differences in the prescribed gain at 1 and 2 kHz were observed between premium and basic hearing aids within each company. Premium-feature devices yielded slightly better self-reported hearing abilities than basic-feature devices, but a statistically significant difference was only found in three out of seven outcome variables, and the effect was small. The generalizability of the study is limited to community-dwelling older adults with presbycusis. Thus, further research is needed for understanding the potential effects of hearing aid technology for other populations. Hearing care providers should continue to insist on research to support the choice of more costly premium technologies when prescribing hearing aids for older adults with presbycusis. Clinical Trial Registration: https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/, identifier NCT04539847.

Semantic Context Can Mask Intelligibility Declines at Above-Conversational Speech Levels in Normal-Hearing Listeners.

PURPOSE: While speech audibility generally improves with increasing level, declines in intelligibility are inconsistently observed at above-conversational levels, even in listeners with normal audiograms (NAs). The inconsistent findings could be due to different types of speech materials, ranging from monosyllabic words to everyday sentences, used across studies. Here, we hypothesized that semantic context can "mask" intelligibility declines at high levels by constraining plausible response options. METHOD: Intelligibility was assessed in speech-shaped noise with monosyllabic words, sentences without semantic context, and sentences with semantic context. Two presentation levels were used: 80 and 95 dB SPL broadband. Bandpass filtering was applied to minimize upward spread of masking. Twenty-two young adults with NAs were tested. RESULTS: Poorer performance at the higher level was found with the monosyllabic words and context-free sentences but not with the context-rich sentences. The scores obtained at the higher level with the two context-free materials were strongly correlated. The correlation was independent of the lower-level scores, suggesting that the high-level performance declines reflect "normal" auditory functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Young adults with NAs show intelligibility decreases at above-conversational levels when tested with speech materials without semantic context. Top-down processing as facilitated by context information can mask such declines.

Predicting Aided Outcome With Aided Word Recognition Scores Measured With Linear Amplification at Above-conversational Levels.

OBJECTIVES: Many hearing aid (HA) users receive limited benefit from amplification, especially when trying to understand speech in noise, and they often report hearing-related residual activity limitations. Current HA fitting strategies are typically based on pure-tone hearing thresholds only, even though suprathreshold factors have been linked to aided outcomes. Furthermore, clinical measures of speech perception such as word recognition scores (WRSs) are performed without frequency-specific amplification, likely resulting in suboptimal speech audibility and thus inaccurate estimates of suprathreshold hearing abilities. Corresponding measures with frequency-specific amplification ("aided") would likely improve such estimates and enable more accurate aided outcome prediction. Here, we investigated potential links between either unaided WRSs or aided WRSs measured at several above-conversational levels and two established HA outcome measures: The Hearing-In-Noise Test (HINT) and the International Outcome Inventory for Hearing Aids (IOI-HA). DESIGN: Thirty-seven older individuals with bilateral hearing impairments participated. Two conditions were tested: unaided and aided, with all stimuli presented over headphones. In the unaided condition, the most comfortable level (MCL) for the presented speech stimuli, WRS at MCL+10 dB as well as uncomfortable levels (UCLs) for narrowband noise stimuli were measured. In the aided condition, all stimuli were individually amplified according to the "National Acoustic Laboratories-Revised, Profound" fitting rule. Aided WRSs were then measured using an Interacoustics Affinity system at three above-conversational levels, allowing for the maximum aided WRS as well as the presence of "rollover" in the performance-intensity function to be estimated. Multivariate data analyses were performed to examine the relations between the HINT (measured using a simulated HA with the NAL-RP amplification) or IOI-HA scores (for the participants' own HAs) and various potential predictors (age, pure-tone average hearing loss, unaided WRS, aided WRS, rollover presence [ROp], and UCL). RESULTS: Aided WRSs predicted the HINT scores better than any other predictor and were also the only significant predictor of the IOI-HA scores. In addition, UCL and ROp in the aided WRSs were significant predictors of the HINT scores and competed for variance in the statistical models. Neither age nor pure-tone average hearing loss could predict the two aided outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Aided WRSs can predict HA outcome more effectively than unaided WRSs, age or pure-tone audiometry and could be relatively easily implemented in clinical settings. More research is necessary to better understand the relations between ROp, UCL and speech recognition at above-conversational levels.

Masked Speech Recognition by Normal-Hearing 6-13-Year-Olds in Conditions With and Without Interaural Difference Cues.

Using the Danish 'børneDAT' corpus, the current study aimed to (1) collect normative masked speech recognition data for 6-13-year-olds in conditions with and without interaural difference cues, (2) evaluate the test-retest reliability of these measurements, and (3) compare two widely used measures of binaural/spatial benefit in terms of the obtained scores. Seventy-four children and 17 young adults with normal hearing participated. Using headphone presentation, speech recognition thresholds (SRTs) were measured twice at two separate visits in four conditions. In the first two conditions, børneDAT sentences were presented in diotic stationary speech-shaped noise, with the sentences either interaurally in-phase ('N0S0') or interaurally out-of-phase ('N0S180'). In the other two conditions, børneDAT sentences were simulated to come from 0° azimuth and two running speech maskers from either 0° azimuth ('co-located') or ±90° azimuth ('spatially separated'). In relative terms, the children achieved lower SRTs in stationary noise than in competing speech, whereas the adults showed the opposite pattern. 12-13-year-old children achieved adult-like performance in all but the co-located condition. Younger children showed generally immature speech recognition abilities. Test-retest reliability was highest for the SRTs in stationary noise and lowest for the spatial benefit scores. Mean benefit was comparable for the two measures and participant groups, and the two sets of scores were not correlated with each other. Developmental effects were most pronounced in the conditions with interaural difference cues. In conclusion, reference data for the børneDAT corpus obtained under different acoustic conditions are available that can guide future research and potential clinical applications.

Hearing aid delay in open-fit devices: Preferred sound quality in listeners with normal and impaired hearing.

A key factor influencing sound quality in open-fit digital hearing aids is the processing delay. So far, the delay limit needed for ensuring optimal (rather than tolerable) sound quality has not been established. Using a realistic hearing aid simulator, the current study investigated the relationship between preferred sound quality and five processing delays ranging from 0.5 to 10 ms in listeners with normal and impaired hearing. The listeners with normal hearing showed a strong preference for the shortest delay. For the listeners with impaired hearing, participants with mild hearing losses below 2 kHz also preferred the shortest delay.

Comparing Clinically Applicable Behavioral and Electrophysiological Measures of Speech Detection, Discrimination, and Comprehension.

Effective communication requires good speech perception abilities. Speech perception can be assessed with behavioral and electrophysiological methods. Relating these two types of measures to each other can provide a basis for new clinical tests. In audiological practice, speech detection and discrimination are routinely assessed, whereas comprehension-related aspects are ignored. The current study compared behavioral and electrophysiological measures of speech detection, discrimination, and comprehension. Thirty young normal-hearing native Danish speakers participated. All measurements were carried out with digits and stationary speech-shaped noise as the stimuli. The behavioral measures included speech detection thresholds (SDTs), speech recognition thresholds (SRTs), and speech comprehension scores (i.e., response times). For the electrophysiological measures, multichannel electroencephalography (EEG) recordings were performed. N100 and P300 responses were evoked using an active auditory oddball paradigm. N400 and Late Positive Complex (LPC) responses were evoked using a paradigm based on congruent and incongruent digit triplets, with the digits presented either all acoustically or first visually (digits 1-2) and then acoustically (digit 3). While no correlations between the SDTs and SRTs and the N100 and P300 responses were found, the response times were correlated with the EEG responses to the congruent and incongruent triplets. Furthermore, significant differences between the response times (but not EEG responses) obtained with auditory and visual-then-auditory stimulus presentation were observed. This pattern of results could reflect a faster recall mechanism when the first two digits are presented visually rather than acoustically. The visual-then-auditory condition may facilitate the assessment of comprehension-related processes in hard-of-hearing individuals.

Towards Auditory Profile-Based Hearing-Aid Fittings: BEAR Rationale and Clinical Implementation.

(1) Background: To improve hearing-aid rehabilitation, the Danish 'Better hEAring Rehabilitation' (BEAR) project recently developed methods for individual hearing loss characterization and hearing-aid fitting. Four auditory profiles differing in terms of audiometric hearing loss and supra-threshold hearing abilities were identified. To enable auditory profile-based hearing-aid treatment, a fitting rationale leveraging differences in gain prescription and signal-to-noise (SNR) improvement was developed. This report describes the translation of this rationale to clinical devices supplied by three industrial partners. (2) Methods: Regarding the SNR improvement, advanced feature settings were proposed and verified based on free-field measurements made with an acoustic mannikin fitted with the different hearing aids. Regarding the gain prescription, a clinically feasible fitting tool and procedure based on real-ear gain adjustments were developed. (3) Results: Analyses of the collected real-ear gain and SNR improvement data confirmed the feasibility of the clinical implementation. Differences between the auditory profile-based fitting strategy and a current 'best practice' procedure based on the NAL-NL2 fitting rule were verified and are discussed in terms of limitations and future perspectives. (4) Conclusion: Based on a joint effort from academic and industrial partners, the BEAR fitting rationale was transferred to commercially available hearing aids.

Revisiting Auditory Profiling: Can Cognitive Factors Improve the Prediction of Aided Speech-in-Noise Outcome?

Hearing aids (HA) are the most common type of rehabilitation treatment for age-related hearing loss. However, HA users often obtain limited benefit from their devices, particularly in noisy environments, and thus many HA candidates do not use them at all. A possible reason for this could be that current HA fittings are audiogram-based, that is, they neglect supra-threshold factors. In an earlier study, an auditory-profiling method was proposed as a basis for more personalized HA fittings. This method classifies HA users into four profiles that differ in terms of hearing sensitivity and supra-threshold hearing abilities. Previously, HA users belonging to these profiles showed significant differences in terms of speech recognition in noise but not subjective assessments of speech-in-noise (SIN) outcome. Moreover, large individual differences within some profiles were observed. The current study therefore explored if cognitive factors can help explain these differences and improve aided outcome prediction. Thirty-nine older HA users completed sets of auditory and SIN tests as well as two tablet-based cognitive measures (the Corsi block-tapping and trail-making tests). Principal component analyses were applied to extract the dominant sources of variance both within individual tests producing many variables and within the three types of tests. Multiple linear regression analyses performed on the extracted components showed that auditory factors were related to aided speech recognition in noise but not to subjective SIN outcome. Cognitive factors were unrelated to aided SIN outcome. Overall, these findings provide limited support for adding those two cognitive tests to the profiling of HA users.

Monaural and binaural phase sensitivity in school-age children with early-childhood otitis media.

OBJECTIVE: Previous research has linked recurrent otitis media (OM) during early childhood to reduced binaural masking level differences (BMLDs) in school-age children. How this finding relates to monaural processing abilities and the individual otologic history has not been investigated systematically. The current study, therefore, addressed these issues. DESIGN: Sensitivity to monaural and binaural phase information was assessed using a common test paradigm. To evaluate the influence of the otologic history, overall OM duration, OM onset age, and the time since the last OM episode were considered in the analyses. STUDY SAMPLE: Children aged 6-13 years with a history of recurrent OM (N = 42) or without any previous ear diseases (N = 20). RESULTS: Compared to the controls, the OM children showed smaller BMLDs (p < 0.05) whereas their monaural and binaural detection thresholds were comparable (p > 0.05). After controlling for age, the otologic history factors failed to predict the BMLDs of the OM children. Their monaural detection thresholds were correlated with the binaural detection thresholds (r = ∼0.5, p < 0.05) but not the BMLDs. CONCLUSIONS: The current study suggests that early-childhood OM can impair binaural processing abilities in school-age children.

Corrigendum: Auditory tests for characterizing hearing deficits in listeners with various hearing abilities: The BEAR test battery.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2021.724007.].

Auditory Tests for Characterizing Hearing Deficits in Listeners With Various Hearing Abilities: The BEAR Test Battery.

The Better hEAring Rehabilitation (BEAR) project aims to provide a new clinical profiling tool-a test battery-for hearing loss characterization. Although the loss of sensitivity can be efficiently measured using pure-tone audiometry, the assessment of supra-threshold hearing deficits remains a challenge. In contrast to the classical "attenuation-distortion" model, the proposed BEAR approach is based on the hypothesis that the hearing abilities of a given listener can be characterized along two dimensions, reflecting independent types of perceptual deficits (distortions). A data-driven approach provided evidence for the existence of different auditory profiles with different degrees of distortions. Ten tests were included in a test battery, based on their clinical feasibility, time efficiency, and related evidence from the literature. The tests were divided into six categories: audibility, speech perception, binaural processing abilities, loudness perception, spectro-temporal modulation sensitivity, and spectro-temporal resolution. Seventy-five listeners with symmetric, mild-to-severe sensorineural hearing loss were selected from a clinical population. The analysis of the results showed interrelations among outcomes related to high-frequency processing and outcome measures related to low-frequency processing abilities. The results showed the ability of the tests to reveal differences among individuals and their potential use in clinical settings.

Influence of Three Auditory Profiles on Aided Speech Perception in Different Noise Scenarios.

Hearing aid (HA) users differ greatly in their speech-in-noise (SIN) outcomes. This could be because the degree to which current HA fittings can address individual listening needs differs across users and listening situations. In two earlier studies, an auditory test battery and a data-driven method were developed for classifying HA candidates into four distinct auditory profiles differing in audiometric hearing loss and suprathreshold hearing abilities. This study explored aided SIN outcome for three of these profiles in different noise scenarios. Thirty-one older habitual HA users and six young normal-hearing listeners participated. Two SIN tasks were administered: a speech recognition task and a "just follow conversation" task requiring the participants to self-adjust the target-speech level. Three noise conditions were tested: stationary speech-shaped noise, speech-shaped babble noise, and speech-shaped babble noise with competing dialogues. Each HA user was fitted with three HAs from different manufacturers using their recommended procedures. Real-ear measurements were performed to document the final gain settings. The results showed that HA users with mild hearing deficits performed better than HA users with pronounced hearing deficits on the speech recognition task but not the just follow conversation task. Moreover, participants with pronounced hearing deficits obtained different SIN outcomes with the tested HAs, which appeared to be related to differences in HA gain. Overall, these findings imply that current proprietary fitting strategies are limited in their ability to ensure good SIN outcomes, especially for users with pronounced hearing deficits, for whom the choice of device seems most consequential.

Towards Auditory Profile-Based Hearing-Aid Fitting: Fitting Rationale and Pilot Evaluation.

Background-The clinical characterization of hearing deficits for hearing-aid fitting purposes is typically based on the pure-tone audiogram only. In a previous study, a group of hearing-impaired listeners completed a comprehensive test battery that was designed to tap into different dimensions of hearing abilities. A data-driven analysis of the data yielded four clinically relevant patient sub-populations or "auditory profiles". The purpose of the current study was to propose and pilot-test profile-based hearing-aid settings in order to explore their potential for providing more targeted hearing-aid treatment. Methods-Four candidate hearing-aid settings were developed and evaluated by a subset of the participants tested previously. The evaluation consisted of multi-comparison preference ratings that were carried out in realistic sound scenarios. Results-Listeners belonging to the different auditory profiles showed different patterns of preference for the tested hearing-aid settings that were largely consistent with the expectations. Conclusions-The results of this pilot evaluation support further investigations into stratified, profile-based hearing-aid fitting with wearable hearing aids.