Analysis of the variability of auditory brainstem response components through linear regression

(ABR) is of fundamental importance to the investiga- tion of the auditory system behavior, though its in- terpretation has a subjective nature because of the manual process employed in its study and the clinical experience required for its analysis. When analyzing the ABR, clinicians are often interested in the identi- fication of ABR signal components referred to as Jewett waves. In particular, the detection and study of the time when these waves occur (i.e., the wave la- tency) is a practical tool for the diagnosis of disorders affecting the auditory system. In this context, the aim of this research is to compare ABR manual/visual analysis provided by different examiners. Methods: The ABR data were collected from 10 normal-hearing subjects (5 men and 5 women, from 20 to 52 years). A total of 160 data samples were analyzed and a pair- wise comparison between four distinct examiners was executed. We carried out a statistical study aiming to identify significant differences between assessments provided by the examiners. For this, we used Linear Regression in conjunction with Bootstrap, as a me- thod for evaluating the relation between the responses given by the examiners. Results: The analysis sug- gests agreement among examiners however reveals differences between assessments of the variability of the waves. We quantified the magnitude of the ob- tained wave latency differences and 18% of the inves- tigated waves presented substantial differences (large and moderate) and of these 3.79% were considered not acceptable for the clinical practice. Conclusions: Our results characterize the variability of the manual analysis of ABR data and the necessity of establishing unified standards and protocols for the analysis of these data. These results may also contribute to the validation and development of automatic systems that are employed in the early diagnosis of hearing loss.

Assessment of inter-examiner agreement and variability in the manual classification of auditory brainstem response

Abstract Background: The analysis of the Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) is of fundamental importance to the investigation of the auditory system behaviour, though its interpretation has a subjective nature because of the manual process employed in its study and the clinical experience required for its analysis. When analysing the ABR, clinicians are often interested in the identification of ABR signal components referred to as Jewett waves. In particular, the detection and study of the time when these waves occur (i.e., the wave latency) is a practical tool for the diagnosis of disorders affecting the auditory system. Significant differences in inter-examiner results may lead to completely distinct clinical interpretations of the state of the auditory system. In this context, the aim of this research was to evaluate the inter-examiner agreement and variability in the manual classification of ABR. Methods: A total of 160 ABR data samples were collected, for four different stimulus intensity (80dBHL, 60dBHL, 40dBHL and 20dBHL), from 10 normal-hearing subjects (5 men and 5 women, from 20 to 52 years). Four examiners with expertise in the manual classification of ABR components participated in the study. The Bland-Altman statistical method was employed for the assessment of inter-examiner agreement and variability. The mean, standard deviation and error for the bias, which is the difference between examiners’ annotations, were estimated for each pair of examiners. Scatter plots and histograms were employed for data visualization and analysis. Results: In most comparisons the differences between examiner’s annotations were below 0.1 ms, which is clinically acceptable. In four cases, it was found a large error and standard deviation (>0.1 ms) that indicate the presence of outliers and thus, discrepancies between examiners. Conclusions: Our results quantify the inter-examiner agreement and variability of the manual analysis of ABR data, and they also allows for the determination of different patterns of manual ABR analysis.

Lexical access across languages: a multinomial model of auditory distraction

Recall in many types of verbal memory task is reliably disrupted by the presence of auditory distracters, with verbal distracters frequently proving the most disruptive (Beaman, 2005). A multinomial processing tree model (Schweickert, 1993) is applied to the effects on free recall of background speech from a known or an unknown language. The model reproduces the free recall curve and the impact on memory of verbal distracters for which a lexical entry exists (i.e., verbal items from a known language). The effects of semantic relatedness of distracters within a language is found to depend upon a redintegrative factor thought to reflect the contribution of the speech-production system. The differential impacts of known and unknown languages cannot be accounted for in this way, but the same effects of distraction are observed amongst bilinguals, regardless of distracter-language.

Bridging a yawning chasm: EEG investigations into the debate concerning the role of the human mirror neuron system in contagious yawning

Ongoing debate in the literature concerns whether there is a link between contagious yawning and the human mirror neuron system (hMNS). One way of examining this issue is with the use of the electroencephalogram (EEG) to measure changes in mu activation during the observation of yawns. Mu oscillations are seen in the alpha bandwidth of the EEG (8–12 Hz) over sensorimotor areas. Previous work has shown that mu suppression is a useful index of hMNS activation and is sensitive to individual differences in empathy. In two experiments, we presented participants with videos of either people yawning or control stimuli. We found greater mu suppression for yawns than for controls over right motor and premotor areas, particularly for those scoring higher on traits of empathy. In a third experiment, auditory recordings of yawns were compared against electronically scrambled versions of the same yawns. We observed greater mu suppression for yawns than for the controls over right lateral premotor areas. Again, these findings were driven by those scoring highly on empathy. The results from these experiments support the notion that the hMNS is involved in contagious yawning, emphasise the link between contagious yawning and empathy, and stress the importance of good control stimuli.

Memo test: standardisation of computerised assessment of auditory verbal short-term memory

Short-term memory (STM) impairments are prevalent in adults with acquired brain injuries. While there are several published tests to assess these impairments, the majority require speech production, e.g. digit span (Wechsler, 1987). This feature may make them unsuitable for people with aphasia and motor speech disorders because of word finding difficulties and speech demands respectively. If patients perceive the speech demands of the test to be high, the may not engage with testing. Furthermore, existing STM tests are mainly ‘pen-and-paper’ tests, which can jeopardise accuracy. To address these shortcomings, we designed and standardised a novel computerised test that does not require speech output and because of the computerised delivery it would enable clinicians identify STM impairments with greater precision than current tests. The matching listening span tasks, similar to the non-normed PALPA 13 (Kay, Lesser & Coltheart, 1992) is used to test short-term memory for serial order of spoken items. Sequences of digits are presented in pairs. The person hears the first sequence, followed by the second sequence and s/he decides whether the two sequences are the same or different. In the computerised test, the sequences are presented in live voice recordings on a portable computer through a software application (Molero Martin, Laird, Hwang & Salis 2013). We collected normative data from healthy older adults (N=22-24) using digits, real words (one- and two-syllables) and non-words (one- and two- syllables). Their performance was scored following two systems. The Highest Span system was the highest span length (e.g. 2-8) at which a participant correctly responded to over 7 out of 10 trials at the highest sequence length. Test re-test reliability was also tested in a subgroup of participants. The test will be available as free of charge for clinicians and researchers to use.