Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Bias in scoring auditory brainstem responses.

D Gans1, D Del Zotto, K D Gans

  • 1Speech and Hearing Clinic, Kent State University, Ohio 44242.

British Journal of Audiology
|December 1, 1992
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Electronic health records and patient safety: co-occurrence of early EHR implementation with patient safety practices in primary care settings.

Applied clinical informatics·2015
Same author

Suspected bacterial endophthalmitis following intravitreal anti-VEGF injection: case series and literature review.

Ophthalmologica. Journal international d'ophtalmologie. International journal of ophthalmology. Zeitschrift fur Augenheilkunde·2012
Same author

Elder abuse by adult children: an applied ecological framework for understanding contextual risk factors and the intergenerational character of quality of life.

International journal of aging & human development·2000
Same author

Hearing aid effect in older females.

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology·1998
Same author

Auditory-evoked response morphology in profoundly-involved multi-handicapped children: comparisons with normal infants and children.

Audiology : official organ of the International Society of Audiology·1995
Same author

Development of a hearing test protocol for profoundly involved multi-handicapped children.

Ear and hearing·1993
Same journal

Effects of slow- and fast-acting compression on the detection of gaps in narrow bands of noise.

British journal of audiology·2002
Same journal

Measurement of first- and second-order modulation detection thresholds in listeners with cochlear hearing loss.

British journal of audiology·2002
Same journal

Comparison of three procedures for initial fitting of compression hearing aids. I. Experienced users, fitted bilaterally.

British journal of audiology·2002
Same journal

Assessing service quality in paediatric audiology and early deaf education.

British journal of audiology·2002
Same journal

Comparison of the electroacoustic characteristics of five hearing aids.

British journal of audiology·2002
Same journal

Use of the 'real-ear to dial difference' to derive real-ear SPL from hearing level obtained with insert earphones.

British journal of audiology·2002
See all related articles

Judges assessing auditory brainstem response (ABR) thresholds were influenced by preliminary information, even experienced ones. This bias was more pronounced in difficult ABR waveform analyses.

Area of Science:

  • Audiology
  • Neuroscience
  • Pediatric Medicine

Background:

  • Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) testing is crucial for assessing hearing in children.
  • Scoring bias in ABR threshold estimation can impact diagnostic accuracy.
  • Understanding factors influencing ABR interpretation is vital for reliable clinical outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of scoring bias on Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) threshold estimation in multi-handicapped children.
  • To determine if judge experience mitigates bias in ABR waveform analysis.
  • To identify conditions under which ABR scoring bias is most prevalent.

Main Methods:

  • Fifty multi-handicapped children's ABR waveforms were analyzed by nine judges.
  • Judges received either true or false ABR threshold information before estimation.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Waveforms were re-evaluated with reversed biasing information to assess consistency.

    • Main Results:

    • Judges exhibited bias when provided with preliminary threshold information, affecting their ABR threshold estimations.
    • More experienced judges demonstrated higher accuracy but were not immune to bias.
    • The influence of bias was significantly greater in ABR analyses deemed more difficult.

    Conclusions:

    • Preliminary threshold information can introduce significant bias in ABR interpretation, regardless of judge experience.
    • Difficult ABR waveform analyses are more susceptible to scoring bias.
    • Strategies to mitigate bias are essential for accurate ABR threshold determination in pediatric audiology.