Literature DB >> 12076018

Quantifying the benefits of additional channels of multifocal VEP recording.

Donald C Hood1, Xian Zhang, Jenny E Hong, Candice S Chen.   

Abstract

For some individuals and for some locations, multifocal visual evoked potentials (mfVEP) may be too small or appear 'too noisy' to be reliably measured. By adding electrodes, especially electrodes placed lateral to the midline, and by recording with multiple channels, the amplitude of the signal can be increased in some field locations. However, the addition of electrodes involves certain costs; the set-up time is longer and the data analysis more time consuming and complex. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of adding electrodes by quantifying these benefits using a signal-to-noise measure. In addition to the typical midline placement of electrodes, two electrodes were placed 1 cm above and 4 cm lateral to the inion on each side. This allowed for 3 channels of recording and 3 additional, derived channels. The mfVEPs were recorded with a 60 sector, pattern-reversing display presented to one eye. Two 7 min records were obtained from 14 individuals with no known visual problems. The two records were averaged and a signal-to-noise (SNR) measure was obtained for every response from all 6 channels. For each sector of the display and each subject, the benefits of additional electrodes were quantified by comparing the SNR from the traditional midline channel to the best SNR from amongst the 6 channels. The number of responses exceeding any given criterion SNR value was increased with the additional channels. For example, 79% of the responses for the typical midline channel exceeded a SNR of 0.6 (a false positive rate of about 2.5%) and this increased to 93% when the best SNR value was used. As expected, summing the mfVEP responses from contiguous sectors also increased the SNR values. Additional electrodes and multiple channels of recording substantially improve the quality of the mfVEP records and the SNR measure provides a useful metric for assessing these benefits.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12076018     DOI: 10.1023/a:1015235617673

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0012-4486            Impact factor:   2.379


  10 in total

1.  An interocular comparison of the multifocal VEP: a possible technique for detecting local damage to the optic nerve.

Authors:  D C Hood; X Zhang; V C Greenstein; S Kangovi; J G Odel; J M Liebmann; R Ritch
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  Multifocal ERG and VEP responses and visual fields: comparing disease-related changes.

Authors:  D C Hood; X Zhang
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  Objective perimetry in glaucoma.

Authors:  A Klistorner; S L Graham
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 12.079

4.  A signal-to-noise analysis of multifocal VEP responses: an objective definition for poor records.

Authors:  Xian Zhang; Donald C Hood; Candice S Chen; Jenny E Hong
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 2.379

5.  Objective VEP perimetry in glaucoma: asymmetry analysis to identify early deficits.

Authors:  S L Graham; A I Klistorner; J R Grigg; F A Billson
Journal:  J Glaucoma       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  The topography of visual evoked response properties across the visual field.

Authors:  H A Baseler; E E Sutter; S A Klein; T Carney
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1994-01

7.  Multifocal topographic visual evoked potential: improving objective detection of local visual field defects.

Authors:  A I Klistorner; S L Graham; J R Grigg; F A Billson
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 4.799

8.  Craniocerebral topography within the international 10-20 system.

Authors:  H Steinmetz; G Fürst; B U Meyer
Journal:  Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  1989-06

9.  Tracking the recovery of local optic nerve function after optic neuritis: a multifocal VEP study.

Authors:  D C Hood; J G Odel; X Zhang
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.799

10.  Multifocal pattern VEP perimetry: analysis of sectoral waveforms.

Authors:  A I Klistorner; S L Graham
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.854

  10 in total
  38 in total

1.  Topography of the chromatic pattern-onset VEP.

Authors:  Christina Gerth; Peter B Delahunt; Michael A Crognale; John S Werner
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  A signal-to-noise analysis of multifocal VEP responses: an objective definition for poor records.

Authors:  Xian Zhang; Donald C Hood; Candice S Chen; Jenny E Hong
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 2.379

3.  Diagnostic value of multifocal VEP using cross-validation and noise reduction in glaucoma research.

Authors:  Thomas Lindenberg; Andrea Peters; Folkert K Horn; Berthold Lausen; Matthias Korth
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-04-15       Impact factor: 3.117

4.  Optimal conditions for multifocal VEP recording for normal Japanese population established by receiver operating characteristic analysis.

Authors:  Kumiko Ishikawa; Takayuki Nagai; Yuko Yamada; Akira Negi; Makoto Nakamura
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-11-18       Impact factor: 2.379

5.  Steady-state multifocal visual evoked potential (ssmfVEP) using dartboard stimulation as a possible tool for objective visual field assessment.

Authors:  Folkert K Horn; Franziska Selle; Bettina Hohberger; Jan Kremers
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2015-11-09       Impact factor: 3.117

6.  Increasing the sensitivity of the multifocal visual evoked potential (mfVEP) technique: incorporating information from higher order kernels using a principal component analysis method.

Authors:  Xian Zhang; Donald C Hood
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.379

7.  Determining abnormal latencies of multifocal visual evoked potentials: a monocular analysis.

Authors:  Donald C Hood; Nitin Ohri; E Bo Yang; Christopher Rodarte; Xian Zhang; Brad Fortune; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 2.379

8.  Determining abnormal interocular latencies of multifocal visual evoked potentials.

Authors:  Donald C Hood; Xian Zhang; Christopher Rodarte; E Bo Yang; Nitin Ohri; Brad Fortune; Chris A Johnson
Journal:  Doc Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 2.379

9.  Multifocal visual-evoked potential in unilateral compressive optic neuropathy.

Authors:  Linda Semela; E Bo Yang; Thomas R Hedges; Laurel Vuong; Jeffery G Odel; Donald C Hood
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-10-31       Impact factor: 4.638

10.  Comparison of contrast-response functions from multifocal visual-evoked potentials (mfVEPs) and functional MRI responses.

Authors:  Jason C Park; Xian Zhang; John Ferrera; Joy Hirsch; Donald C Hood
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 2.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.