Comparison of objective threshold estimation procedures for 40-Hz auditory evoked potentials.

Abstract

Objective threshold estimation is possible using statistics such as magnitude-squared coherence (MSC) and responses such as the 40-Hz auditory evoked potential (AEP). The purpose of this paper is to compare three general methods of threshold estimation using MSC. Using 500-Hz amplitude-modulated tones and 40-Hz AEPs from 10 paid-volunteer young adults with normal hearing, we compared three MSC-based threshold estimation methods--extrapolation, intensity series, and adaptive. The extrapolation method yielded low thresholds but unacceptable variability. The intensity series method was insensitive and time-consuming. Two adaptive methods displayed good performance in terms of precision and sensitivity. The first employed an MSC criterion with a 13.5% false positive rate (per trial), but achieved overall false positive rates under 5% after 5 to 7 runs, requiring 30 to 40 minutes test time (a run is a single set of ascending or descending trials, terminated by a reversal). The second, which performed better overall, included only a single run, but collected more data at intensities near threshold than at higher intensities; test time could be further reduced (from 22 to 18 minutes) by using a stopping rule based on initial MSC and noise power estimates at each test intensity. If speed is paramount, a simple single-run method achieved threshold estimates in about 9 minutes, starting at 40 dB nHL, with acceptable precision but less sensitivity. A single-run adaptive method, with or without collection of additional data near threshold, yielded the best results, in terms of statistical performance and data collection time.