Abstract
Multichannel ABR recordings for 30 otoneurologic patients were reviewed independently by three audiologists to assess interjudge consistency in determining absolute latencies and overall interpretation of ABR results. Four months later, the tracings were reviewed a second time to evaluate intrajudge consistency in interpretation of ABR waveforms. Interjudge agreement in marking latencies for waves I, III, and V within 0.2 ms was on the order of 90% or better. Intrajudge consistency was slightly higher. Only rarely did inter- or intrajudge differences in latency measurements exceed 0.3 ms. Agreement in overall interpretation of ABR results as "normal" or "abnormal" was unanimous for 90% of the patients. Across pairs of judges, the agreement for "normal" and "abnormal" classification of the ABR tracings was 97%. Intrajudge consistency for "normal" and "abnormal" categorization of the ABR results was 100% for one judge, 97% for the other two judges.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
