Objective measures for detecting the auditory brainstem response: comparisons of specificity, sensitivity and detection time
M. A. Chesnaye
S. L. Bell
J. M. Harte
D. M. Simpson
10.6084/m9.figshare.5982322.v1
https://tandf.figshare.com/articles/journal_contribution/Objective_measures_for_detecting_the_auditory_brainstem_response_comparisons_of_specificity_sensitivity_and_detection_time/5982322
<p><i>Objective</i>: To evaluate and compare the specificity, sensitivity and detection time of various time-domain and multi-band frequency domain methods when detecting the auditory brainstem response (ABR). <i>Design</i>: Simulations and subject recorded data were used to assess and compare the performance of the Hotelling’s T<sup>2</sup> test (applied in either time or frequency domain), two versions of the modified q-sample uniform scores test and both the Fsp and Fmp, which were evaluated using both conventional F-distributions with assumed degrees of freedom and a bootstrap approach. <i>Study sample</i>: Data consisted of click-evoked ABRs and recordings of EEG background activity from 12 to 17 normal hearing adults, respectively. <i>Results</i>: An overall advantage in sensitivity and detection time was demonstrated for the Hotelling’s T<sup>2</sup> test. The false-positive rates (FPRs) of the Fsp and Fmp were also closer to the nominal alpha-level when evaluating statistical significance using the bootstrap approach, as opposed to using conventional F-distributions. The FPRs of the remaining methods were slightly higher than expected. <i>Conclusions</i>: In this work, Hotelling’s T<sup>2</sup> outperformed the alternative methods for automatically detecting ABRs. Its promise as a sensitive and efficient detection method should now be tested in a larger clinical study.</p>
2018-03-14 16:08:40
Auditory brainstem response detection
Hotelling’s T2
Fsp
Fmp
bootstrapping
modified q-sample uniform scores test