Literature DB >> 4007299

Objective versus visual detection of the auditory brain stem response.

S A Arnold.   

Abstract

The use of objective (mathematical) procedures in auditory brain stem response (ABR) testing has been suggested in order to eliminate the subjectivity of visual judgments and to increase sensitivity of detection. This investigation compared with effectiveness of visual and objective detection of the ABR. Auditory brain stem responses were obtained in normal adults at several click levels. An equal number of waveforms obtained without stimulation were used to measure false-positive responses. Visual judgments of ABR presence were made by four experienced raters. Objective analysis was accomplished using three methods: correlation, variance ratio, and multiple pre-post z tests. The mean sensitivity score was highest for visual detection, followed in order by the correlation, variance ratio, and multiple z test methods. While visual scoring was statistically the most sensitive, the practical difference between measures was small. In addition, there was considerable disagreement between raters in their judgments. Therefore, the most sensitive of the objective measures--correlation, is considered to be a useful detection procedure to eliminate observer bias and to achieve consistency of scoring.

Mesh:

Year:  1985        PMID: 4007299     DOI: 10.1097/00003446-198505000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ear Hear        ISSN: 0196-0202            Impact factor:   3.570


  8 in total

Review 1.  [The binaural interaction component: a clinically useful diagnostic instrument?].

Authors:  W Delb
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  A model of auditory brainstem response wave I morphology.

Authors:  Aryn M Kamerer; Stephen T Neely; Daniel M Rasetshwane
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 3.  The Physiological Basis and Clinical Use of the Binaural Interaction Component of the Auditory Brainstem Response.

Authors:  Geneviève Laumen; Alexander T Ferber; Georg M Klump; Daniel J Tollin
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2016 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  A simple algorithm for objective threshold determination of auditory brainstem responses.

Authors:  Kirupa Suthakar; M Charles Liberman
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2019-08-08       Impact factor: 3.208

5.  The summating potential in human electrocochleography: Gaussian models and Fourier analysis.

Authors:  Kenneth E Hancock; Bennett O'Brien; Rosamaria Santarelli; M Charles Liberman; Stéphane F Maison
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2021-10       Impact factor: 2.482

6.  Objective threshold estimation and measurement of the residual background noise in auditory evoked potentials of goldfish.

Authors:  Jianqiang Xiao; Christopher B Braun
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Objectification of intracochlear electrocochleography using machine learning.

Authors:  Klaus Schuerch; Wilhelm Wimmer; Adrian Dalbert; Christian Rummel; Marco Caversaccio; Georgios Mantokoudis; Stefan Weder
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-08-29       Impact factor: 4.086

8.  Contribution of psychoacoustics and neuroaudiology in revealing correlation of mental disorders with central auditory processing disorders.

Authors:  V Iliadou; S Iakovides
Journal:  Ann Gen Hosp Psychiatry       Date:  2003-05-20
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.