Faster automatic ASSR detection using sequential tests

Abstract Objective: Objective Response Detection (ORD) can be used for auditory steady-state response (ASSR) detection. In conventional ORD methods, the statistical tests are applied at the end of data collection (‘single-shot tests’). In sequential ORD methods, statistical tests are applied repeatedly, while data is being collected. However, repeated testing can increase False Positive (FP) rates. One solution is to infer that response is present only after the test remains significant for a predefined number of consecutive detections (NCD). Thus, this paper describes a new method for finding the required NCD that control the FP rate for ASSR detection. Design: NCD values are estimated using Monte Carlo simulations. Study sample: ASSR signals were recorded from 8 normal-hearing subjects. Results: The exam time was reduced by up to 38.9% compared to the single-shot test with loss of approximately 5% in detection rate. Alternatively, lower gains in time were achieved for a smaller (non-significant) loss in detection rate. The FP rates at the end of the test were kept at the nominal level expected (1%). Conclusion: The sequential test strategy with NCD as the stopping criterion can improve the speed of ASSR detection and prevent higher than expected FP rates.

[1]  R A Dobie,et al.  Objective response detection in the frequency domain. , 1993, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[2]  A. Infantosi,et al.  Coherence between one random and one periodic signal for measuring the strength of responses in the electro-encephalogram during sensory stimulation , 2006, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[3]  Mario Cebulla,et al.  Objective detection of auditory steady-state responses: comparison of one-sample and q-sample tests. , 2006, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[4]  Antônio Maurício Ferreira Leite Miranda de Sá,et al.  Comparison of univariate and multivariate magnitude-squared coherences in the detection of human 40-Hz auditory steady-state evoked responses , 2018, Biomed. Signal Process. Control..

[5]  M A Chesnaye,et al.  A group sequential test for ABR detection , 2019, International journal of audiology.

[6]  Terence W. Picton,et al.  Auditory steady-state responses to multiple simultaneous stimuli , 1995 .

[7]  M. Cebulla,et al.  Objective Detection of the Amplitude Modulation Following Response (AMFR):Detectión objetiva de la respuesta consecuente de amplitud modulada (AMFR) , 2001, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[8]  C. J. Tierra-Criollo,et al.  Objective Response Detection in an Electroencephalogram During Somatosensory Stimulation , 2000, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[9]  Carlos Julio Tierra-Criollo,et al.  Auditory steady-state responses in school-aged children: a pilot study , 2015, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[10]  Terence W Picton,et al.  Estimating audiometric thresholds using auditory steady-state responses. , 2005, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[11]  Lisa L. Hunter,et al.  Evaluation of Speed and Accuracy of Next-Generation Auditory Steady State Response and Auditory Brainstem Response Audiometry in Children With Normal Hearing and Hearing Loss , 2018, Ear and hearing.

[12]  Terence W Picton,et al.  Recording Auditory Steady-State Responses in Young Infants , 2004, Ear and Hearing.

[13]  E. Mijares,et al.  Comparing statistics for objective detection of transient and steady-state evoked responses in newborns , 2013, International journal of audiology.

[14]  L Malis,et al.  Application of phase spectral analysis for brain stem auditory evoked potential detection in normal subjects and patients with posterior fossa tumors. , 1984, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[15]  B. Lütkenhöner.  Theoretical considerations on the detection of evoked responses by means of the Rayleigh test. , 1991, Acta oto-laryngologica. Supplementum.

[16]  Annelies Bockstael,et al.  Determination and evaluation of clinically efficient stopping criteria for the multiple auditory steady-state response technique , 2010, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[17]  Terence W Picton,et al.  Advantages and caveats when recording steady-state responses to multiple simultaneous stimuli. , 2002, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[18]  P. Bauer,et al.  Evaluation of experiments with adaptive interim analyses. , 1994, Biometrics.

[19]  R A Dobie,et al.  Analysis of auditory evoked potentials by magnitude-squared coherence. , 1989, Ear and hearing.

[20]  Antonio Fernando Catelli Infantosi,et al.  Evaluating the relationship of non-phase locked activities in the electroencephalogram during intermittent stimulation: a partial coherence-based approach , 2007, Medical & Biological Engineering & Computing.

[21]  T. Picton.  Hearing in Time: Evoked Potential Studies of Temporal Processing , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[22]  Colette M McKay,et al.  Auditory Steady State Responses in Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Adults: An Analysis of Between-Session Amplitude and Latency Repeatability, Test Time, and F Ratio Detection Paradigms , 2012, Ear and hearing.

[23]  Lidice Galán García,et al.  [Stopping criteria for averaging the multiple auditory steady-state response]. , 2011 .

[24]  Leonardo B. Felix,et al.  Multi-channel evoked response detection using only phase information , 2003, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[25]  Gaetano Paludetti,et al.  Steady State Auditory Evoked Potentials in Normal Hearing Subjects: Evaluation of Threshold and Testing Time , 2012, ORL.

[26]  T. Picton,et al.  Human auditory steady-state responses: Respuestas auditivas de estado estable en humanos , 2003, International journal of audiology.

[27]  C. S. van der Reijden,et al.  Signal-to-noise ratios of the auditory steady-state response from fifty-five EEG derivations in adults. , 2004, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[28]  David Martin Simpson,et al.  The Convolutional Group Sequential Test: Reducing Test Time for Evoked Potentials , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[29]  Mario Cebulla,et al.  Automated auditory response detection: Statistical problems with repeated testing Evaluación repetida en la detección de respuestas auditivas , 2005, International journal of audiology.

[30]  Jennifer L. Smart,et al.  Auditory steady-state responses. , 2012, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[31]  Erik Berninger,et al.  Reliability in Hearing Threshold Prediction in Normal-Hearing and Hearing-Impaired Participants Using Mixed Multiple ASSR. , 2015, Journal of the American Academy of Audiology.

[32]  David R Stapells,et al.  Monotic Versus Dichotic Multiple-Stimulus Auditory Steady State Responses in Young Children , 2013, Ear and hearing.

[33]  T W Picton,et al.  Multiple auditory steady-state responses (MASTER): stimulus and recording parameters. , 1998, Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology.

[34]  David Ulrich Seidel,et al.  Hearing threshold estimation by auditory steady-state responses with narrow-band chirps and adaptive stimulus patterns: implementation in clinical routine , 2013, European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology.

[35]  R. Fisher.  Tests of significance in harmonic analysis , 1929 .

[36]  J. Arvedson,et al.  Early identification and intervention for children who are hearing impaired. , 1998, Pediatrics in review.

[37]  Frederique J. Vanheusden,et al.  Improved Detection of Vowel Envelope Frequency Following Responses Using Hotelling’s T2 Analysis , 2019, Ear and hearing.

[38]  S. Siegel,et al.  Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[39]  Jan Wouters,et al.  The Influence of the Detection Paradigm in Recording Auditory Steady-State Responses , 2008, Ear and hearing.

[40]  R A Dobie,et al.  Objective detection of 40 Hz auditory evoked potentials: phase coherence vs. magnitude-squared coherence. , 1994, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.