{"title":"听觉脑干反应的信号处理:离散小波分析的应用研究","authors":"W. Wilson, M. Winter, G. Kerr, F. Aghdasi","doi":"10.1109/COMSIG.1998.736914","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Multiresolutional wavelet analysis of the auditory brainstem response (ABR) in the time frequency domain (TFD) has immense potential for improving this test's sensitivity and specificity as a diagnostic assessment tool, but the choice of wavelet remains a problem. This study compared the clinical significance, as versus the obvious mathematical significance, of using Daubechies 5, symlet 4, and biorthogonal 3.5 wavelet techniques to obtain ABR TFD results in normal subjects. The wavelet techniques showed multiple statistical differences between their TFD results, with a significant number being clinically significant, particularly for TFD component amplitudes. These findings warn against the clinical comparison of TFD ABR results obtained using different wavelets and reinforces the need to state specifically the wavelet procedures used when conducting clinical ABR multiresolutional wavelet analysis.","PeriodicalId":294473,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 1998 South African Symposium on Communications and Signal Processing-COMSIG '98 (Cat. No. 98EX214)","volume":" 39","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Signal processing of the auditory brainstem response: investigation into the use of discrete wavelet analysis\",\"authors\":\"W. Wilson, M. Winter, G. Kerr, F. Aghdasi\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/COMSIG.1998.736914\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Multiresolutional wavelet analysis of the auditory brainstem response (ABR) in the time frequency domain (TFD) has immense potential for improving this test's sensitivity and specificity as a diagnostic assessment tool, but the choice of wavelet remains a problem. This study compared the clinical significance, as versus the obvious mathematical significance, of using Daubechies 5, symlet 4, and biorthogonal 3.5 wavelet techniques to obtain ABR TFD results in normal subjects. The wavelet techniques showed multiple statistical differences between their TFD results, with a significant number being clinically significant, particularly for TFD component amplitudes. These findings warn against the clinical comparison of TFD ABR results obtained using different wavelets and reinforces the need to state specifically the wavelet procedures used when conducting clinical ABR multiresolutional wavelet analysis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":294473,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 1998 South African Symposium on Communications and Signal Processing-COMSIG '98 (Cat. No. 98EX214)\",\"volume\":\" 39\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1998-09-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 1998 South African Symposium on Communications and Signal Processing-COMSIG '98 (Cat. No. 98EX214)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/COMSIG.1998.736914\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 1998 South African Symposium on Communications and Signal Processing-COMSIG '98 (Cat. No. 98EX214)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/COMSIG.1998.736914","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Signal processing of the auditory brainstem response: investigation into the use of discrete wavelet analysis
Multiresolutional wavelet analysis of the auditory brainstem response (ABR) in the time frequency domain (TFD) has immense potential for improving this test's sensitivity and specificity as a diagnostic assessment tool, but the choice of wavelet remains a problem. This study compared the clinical significance, as versus the obvious mathematical significance, of using Daubechies 5, symlet 4, and biorthogonal 3.5 wavelet techniques to obtain ABR TFD results in normal subjects. The wavelet techniques showed multiple statistical differences between their TFD results, with a significant number being clinically significant, particularly for TFD component amplitudes. These findings warn against the clinical comparison of TFD ABR results obtained using different wavelets and reinforces the need to state specifically the wavelet procedures used when conducting clinical ABR multiresolutional wavelet analysis.