4.5 Article

Selective processing of auditory evoked responses with iterative-randomized stimulation and averaging: A strategy for evaluating the time-invariant assumption

Journal

HEARING RESEARCH
Volume 333, Issue -, Pages 66-76

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.heares.2015.12.009

Keywords

Randomized stimulation and averaging (RSA); Jitter; Deconvolution; Evoked potentials; Time-invariant; ABR; MLR; SOA

Funding

  1. Australian Government through Department of Health
  2. Ministry of Finance and Competition (Government of Spain) [TEC2009-14245]
  3. Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport (Government of Spain) [AP2009-3150]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The recording of auditory evoked potentials (AEPs) at fast rates allows the study of neural adaptation, improves accuracy in estimating hearing threshold and may help diagnosing certain pathologies. Stimulation sequences used to record AEPs at fast rates require to be designed with a certain jitter, i.e., not periodical. Some authors believe that stimuli from wide-jittered sequences may evoke auditory responses of different morphology, and therefore, the time-invariant assumption would not be accomplished. This paper describes a methodology that can be used to analyze the time-invariant assumption in jittered stimulation sequences. The proposed method [Split-IRSA] is based on an extended version of the iterative randomized stimulation and averaging (IRSA) technique, including selective processing of sweeps according to a predefined criterion. The fundamentals, the mathematical basis and relevant implementation guidelines of this technique are presented in this paper. The results of this study show that Split-IRSA presents an adequate performance and that both fast and slow mechanisms of adaptation influence the evoked-response morphology, thus both mechanisms should be considered when time invariance is assumed. The significance of these findings is discussed. Crown Copyright (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available