Reliability of electric response audiometry using 80 Hz auditory steady-state responses

References

• American National Standards Institute. 1996. American National Standards Specification for Audiometers. ANSI S3.6-1996. New York: American National Standards Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Ananthanarayan A.K., Durrant J.D. The frequency-following response and the onset response: evaluation of frequency specificity using a forward-masking paradigm. Ear Hear 1992; 13(4)228–32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aoyagi M., Kiren T., Furuse H., Fuse T., Suzuki Y., et al. Pure-tone threshold prediction by 80 Hz amplitude-modulation following response. Acta Otolaryngol. Suppl. (Stockh) 1994; 511: 7–14
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Beattie R.C., Lipp L.A. Effects of electrode placement on the auditory brainstem response using ear canal electrodes. Am J Otol 1990; 11(5)314–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bonvier R. Slow auditory evoked potentials: The end of malingering in audiology. Int Tinnitus J 2002; 8: 58–61
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cohen L.T., Rickards F.W., Clark G.M. A comparison of steady-state evoked potentials to modulated tones in awake and sleeping humans. J Acoust Soc Am 1991; 90: 2467–79
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coles R.R.A., Mason S. The results of cortical electric response audiometry in medico-legal investigations. Br J Audiol 1984; 18: 71–78
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cone-Wesson B., Wunderlich J. Auditory evoked potentials from the cortex: Audiology applications. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2003; 11(5)372–7
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dimitrijevic A., John S., van Roon P., Purcell D.W., Adamonis J., et al. Estimating the audiogram using multiple auditory steady-state responses. J Am Acad Audiol 2002; 13: 205–24
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Don M., Eggermont J.J. Analysis of the click evoked brainstem potentials in man using high-pass masking. J Acoust Soc Am 1978; 63: 1084–1092
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durrant J.D. Simulated hearing loss via masking: Research and heuristic applications. Sem Hear 2004; 25: 25–37
   Google Scholar
• Fausti S.A., Mitchell C.R., Frey R.H., Henry J.A., O'Connor J.L. Multiple-stimulus method for rapid collection of auditory brainstem responses using high-frequency (≥8000 Hz) tone bursts. J Am Acad Audiol 1994; 5(2)119–126
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Feldt L.S., Brennan R.L. Reliability in Educational MeasurementThird Edition, Robert Linn. Oryx Press, Phoenix, AZ 1993; 105
   Google Scholar
• Ferrara M., Gennaro L.D., Ferlazzo F., Curcio G., Barattucci M., et al. Auditory evoked responses upon awakening from sleep in human subjects. Neuroscience Letters 2001; 310(2–3)145–48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gay L.R., Mills G.E., Airasian P. Educational Research: Competencies for analysis and applicationsEighth Edition. Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ 2006
   Google Scholar
• Guilford J.P. Psychometric Methods. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY 1954
   Google Scholar
• Herdman A.T., Picton T.W., Stapells D.R. Place specificity of multiple auditory steady-state responses. J Acoust Soc Am 2002; 112(4)1569–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herdman A.T., Stapells D.R. Auditory steady-state response thresholds of adults with sensorineural hearing impairments. Int J Audiol 2003; 42: 237–48
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoke M., Pantev C., Ansa L., Lütkenhöner B., Herrmann E. A time saving BERA technique for frequency specific assessment of the auditory threshold through tone-pulse series stimulation (TOPSTIM) with simultaneous gliding high-pass noise masking (GHINOMA). Acta Otolaryngol Suppl 1991; 482: 45–56
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Humes L.E. Masking of tone bursts by modulated noise in normal, noise-masked normal, and hearing-impaired listeners. J Speech Hear Res 1990; 33(1)3–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hyde M.L., Alberti P.W., Matsumoto N., Li Y. Auditory evoked potentials in audiometric assessment of compensation and medicolegal patients. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 1986; 95: 514–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobson G.P., McCaslin D.L., Smith B., Elisevich K., Mishler P. Test-retest stability and short-term habituation of the N1 and gamma band response. J Am Acad Audiol 1999; 10: 211–18
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• John M.S., Dimitrijevic A., van Roon P., Picton T.W. Multiple auditory steady-state responses to AM and FM stimuli. Audiol Neuro-otol 2001; 6: 12–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John M.S., Lins O.G., Boucher B.L., Picton T.W. Multiple auditory steady-state responses (MASTER): stimulus and recording parameters. Audiology 1998; 37: 59–82
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• John M.S., Picton T.W. MASTER: a windows program for recording multiple auditory steady-state responses. Comp Methods Prog Biomed 2000; 61: 125–50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaf, W.A., Durrant, J.D., Sabo, D.L., Boston, R.J., Taubman, L.B., , et al, (in press). Validity and accuracy of electric response audiometry using the auditory steady-state response: Evaluation in an empirical design. Int J Audiol.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lauter J.L., Oyler R.F. Latency stability of auditory brainstem responses in children aged 10–12 years compared with younger children and adults. Br J Audiol 1992; 26(4)245–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lauter J.L., Oyler R.F., Lord-Maes J. Amplitude stability of auditory brainstem responses in two groups of children compared with adults. Br J Audiol 1993; 27(4)263–71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lins O.G., Picton T.W., Boucher B.L., Durieux-Smith A., Champagne S.C., et al. Frequency-specific audiometry using steady-state responses. Ear Hear 1996; 17(2)81–96
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luts H., Wouters J. Comparison of MASTER and AUDERA for measurement of auditory steady-state responses. Int J Audiol 2005; 44: 244–253
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Özdamar Ö., Delgado R.E., Eilers R.E., Urbano R.C. Automated electrophysiologic hearing testing using a threshold-seeking algorithm. J Am Avad Audiol 1994; 5(2)77–88
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Parker D.J., Thornton A.R.D. The validity of the derived cochlear nerve and brainstem evoked response of the human auditory system. Scand Audiol 1978; 7: 45–52
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pekkonen E., Rinne T., Naatanen R. Variability and replicability of the mismatch negativity. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1995; 96: 546–54
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Perez-Abalo M.C., Savio G., Torres A., Martin V., Rodriguez E., Galán L. Steady state response to multiple amplitude-modulated tones: An optimized method to test frequency-specific thresholds in hearing-impaired children and normal-hearing subjects. Ear Hear 2001; 22(3)200–11
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pethe J., Von Specht H., Mühler R., Hocke T. Amplitude modulation following responses in awake and sleeping humans: A comparison for 40 Hz and 80 Hz modulation frequency. Scand Audiol Suppl 2002; 52: 152–155
   Google Scholar
• Petitot C., Collet L., Durrant J.D. Auditory steady-state responses (ASSR): Effects of modulation and carrier frequencies. Int J Audiol 2005; 44(10)567–73
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rance G., Dowell R.C., Rickards F.W., Beer D.E., Clark G.M. Steady-state evoked potential and behavioral hearing thresholds in a group of children with absent click evoked auditory brainstem response. Ear Hear 1998; 19: 48–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sechrest L. Reliability and validity. Research methods in clinical psychology, A.S. Bellack, M. Hersen. Pergamon Press, New York 1984; 24–54
   Google Scholar
• Segalowitz S.J., Barnes K.L. The reliability of ERP components in the auditory oddball paradigm. Psychophysiology 1993; 30: 451–459
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sommers M.S., Humes L.E. Auditory filter shapes in normal-hearing, noise-masked normal, and elderly listeners. J Acoust Soc Am 1993; 93(5)2903–14
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stürzebecher E., Cebulla M., Elberling C. Automated auditory response detection: Statistical problems with repeated testing. Int J Audiol 2005; 44: 110–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsui B., Wong L., Wong E. Accuracy of the cortical evoked response audiometry in the identification of non-organic hearing loss. Int J Audiol 2002; 41: 330–333
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valdes J.L., Perez-Abalo M., Martin V., Savio G., Sierra C., et al. Comparison of statistical indication for the automatic detection of 80 Hz auditory steady state responses. Ear Hear 1997; 18: 420–29
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Maanen, A. & Stapells, D.R. Comparison of multiple auditory steady-state responses (80 versus 40 Hz) and slow cortical potentials for threshold estimation in hearing-impaired adults. Int J Audiol, 44, 613–624.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar