Modeling of the brainstem evoked response for objective automated interpretation

Audiologists use the auditory brainstem evoked response (BER) to provide an objective way of ascertaining the hearing threshold of patients. The response is recorded with an acoustic stimulus which is reduced in intensity until a response is no longer observed. Of the live predominant waves that appear within the first 10ms, wave V can be detected down to threshold level. An audiologist would look for evidence of wave V in the time domain waveform when assessing threshold level, but also take into account the morphology of the waveform. When a fast Fourier transform (FFT), is applied to the data, it shows dominant frequencies around 200, 500 and 900Hz. This can provide an alternative description of morphology. Software models are created to characterize the waveform at different stimulus intensity levels. They use information from both the time and frequency domains of the BER as input for an expert system. Results show that the use of multiple methods of modeling can aid the automated interpretation and so simulate, in some measure, the analysis work of the trained audiologist in detecting wave V.

[1]  Jean-François Motsch,et al.  Objective detection of brainstem auditory evoked potentials with a priori information from higher presentation levels , 2002, Artif. Intell. Medicine.

[2]  J B Habraken,et al.  Identification of peak V in brainstem auditory evoked potentials with neural networks. , 1993, Computers in biology and medicine.

[3]  H Pratt,et al.  Auditory brainstem evoked potentials peak identification by finite impulse response digital filters. , 1989, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[4]  J. Tukey,et al.  An algorithm for the machine calculation of complex Fourier series , 1965 .

[5]  Özcan Özdamar,et al.  Auditory brainstem evoked potential classification for threshold detection by neural networks. I. Network design, similarities between human-expert and network classification, feasibility , 1992 .

[6]  S. Stanton,et al.  Auditory brainstem response. A comparison of different interpretation strategies for detection of cerebellopontine angle tumors. , 1996, Scandinavian audiology.

[7]  J. Ross Quinlan,et al.  Induction of Decision Trees , 1986, Machine Learning.

[8]  T. Suzuki,et al.  Power spectral analysis of auditory brain stem responses to pure tone stimuli. , 1982, Scandinavian audiology.

[9]  J. Robert Boston,et al.  Spectra of Auditory Brainstem Responses and Spontaneous EEG , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[10]  O. Ozdamar,et al.  Automated auditory brainstem response interpretation , 1994, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine.

[11]  B. Herrmann,et al.  Automated Infant Hearing Screening Using the ABR , 1995 .

[12]  D L Jewett,et al.  Volume-conducted potentials in response to auditory stimuli as detected by averaging in the cat. , 1970, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.