Template subtraction to remove CI stimulation artifacts in auditory steady-state responses in CI subjects.
Open accessAbstract
Cochlear implant (CI) stimulation artifacts are currently removed from electrically evoked steady-state response (EASSR) measurements based on a linear interpolation (LI) over the artifact-contaminated signal parts. LI is only successful if CI stimulation artifacts are shorter than the interpulse interval, i.e., for contralateral channels and stimulation pulse rates up to 500 pulses per second (pps). The objective of this paper is to develop and evaluate a template subtraction (TS) method to remove continuous CI stimulation artifacts in order to accurately measure EASSRs. The template construction (TC) is based on an EEG recording containing CI stimulation artifacts but no synchronous neural response. The constructed templates are subtracted from the recording of interest. Response amplitudes and latencies are compared for the TS and LI method, and for different TC durations. The response amplitudes and latencies in contralateral channels are the same after TS and LI, as expected. In ipsilateral channels, response amplitudes and latencies are within the expected range only after TS. The TC duration can be reduced from 5 min to 1 min without a significant effect on response latency. TS with a TC duration of only 1 min allows to remove all CI stimulation artifacts in individual contra- and ipsilateral EEG recording channels.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The artifact waveform template can be obtained by least-mean-square algorithms, genetic algorithms, principal component analysis, and wavelet algorithms.
“The template of the artifact waveform can be obtained by the least-mean-square algorithms, genetic algorithms (Qiu et al., 2015), principal component analysis (Deprez et al., 2017), and wavelet algorithms (Yochum and Binczak, 2015).”
From Advances in Neural Recording and Stimulation Integrated Circuits (2021) · cites this paper as Deprez et al., 2017
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
The Generalization of Student's Ratio
Hotelling, H. (1931) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177732979 · Cited by 1,512 · see citing works
The Generalization of Student’s Ratio
Hotelling, H. (1992) · Springer series in statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-0919-5_4 · Cited by 1,082 · see citing works
Sharma, A., Dorman, M. F., & Spahr, A. J. (2002) · Ear and Hearing · doi:10.1097/00003446-200212000-00004 · Cited by 951 · see citing works
Human auditory steady-state responses: Respuestas auditivas de estado estable en humanos
Picton, T. W., John, M. S., Dimitrijevic, A., & Purcell, D. (2003) · International Journal of Audiology · doi:10.3109/14992020309101316 · Cited by 849 · see citing works
Cortical development, plasticity and re-organization in children with cochlear implants
Sharma, A., Nash-Kille, A., & Dorman, M. F. (2009) · Journal of Communication Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2009.03.003 · Cited by 305 · see citing works
Brown, C., Hughes, M. L., Luk, B., Abbas, P. J., Wolaver, A. A., & Gervais, J. P. (2000) · Ear and Hearing · doi:10.1097/00003446-200004000-00009 · Cited by 274 · see citing works
Deprivation-induced cortical reorganization in children with cochlear implants
Sharma, A., Gilley, P. M., Dorman, M. F., & Baldwin, R. (2007) · International Journal of Audiology · doi:10.1080/14992020701524836 · Cited by 254 · see citing works
Bilateral input protects the cortex from unilaterally-driven reorganization in children who are deaf
Gordon, K. A., Wong, D. D. E., & Papsin, B. C. (2013) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/awt052 · Cited by 246 · see citing works
Cortical reorganization in children with cochlear implants
Gilley, P. M., Sharma, A., & Dorman, M. F. (2008) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2008.08.026 · Cited by 191 · see citing works
Minimization of cochlear implant stimulus artifact in cortical auditory evoked potentials
Gilley, P. M., Sharma, A., Dorman, M. F., Finley, C. C., Panch, A. S., & Martin, K. (2006) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/j.clinph.2006.04.018 · Cited by 189 · see citing works
Comparison of EAP Thresholds with MAP Levels in the Nucleus 24 Cochlear Implant: Data from Children
Hughes, M. L., Brown, C., Abbas, P. J., Wolaver, A. A., & Gervais, J. P. (2000) · Ear and Hearing · doi:10.1097/00003446-200004000-00010 · Cited by 181 · see citing works
Dobie, R. A., & Wilson, M. J. (1996) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.417933 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Aoyagi, M., Kiren, T., Kim, Y., et al. (1993) · Hearing Research · doi:10.1016/0378-5955(93)90218-p · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Sound Coding in Cochlear Implants: From electric pulses to hearing
Wouters, J. M., McDermott, H. J., & Francart, T. (2015) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2014.2371671 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Self-citationLevi, E. C., Folsom, R. C., & Dobie, R. A. (1993) · Hearing Research · doi:10.1016/0378-5955(93)90063-7 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
A novel stimulus artifact removal technique for high-rate electrical stimulation
Heffer, L. F., & Fallon, J. B. (2008) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2008.01.023 · Cited by 121 · see citing works
Cochlear Implants and Brain Plasticity
Fallon, J. B., Irvine, D. R. F., & Shepherd, R. K. (2002) · KARGER eBooks · doi:10.1159/isbn.978-3-318-00824-1 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Martin, B. A. (2007) · Journal of the American Academy of Audiology · doi:10.3766/jaaa.18.2.5 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
Electrically Evoked Auditory Steady State Responses in Cochlear Implant Users
Hofmann, M. H., & Wouters, J. M. (2009) · Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology · doi:10.1007/s10162-009-0201-z · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Self-citationCan ECAP measures be used for totally objective programming of cochlear implants?
McKay, C. M., Chandan, K., Akhoun, I., Siciliano, C., & Kluk, K. (2013) · Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology · doi:10.1007/s10162-013-0417-9 · Cited by 81 · see citing works
Viola, F. C., Vos, M. D., Hine, J. E., Sandmann, P., Bleeck, S., Eyles, J., & Debener, S. (2012) · Hearing Research · doi:10.1016/j.heares.2011.12.010 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
A method for removing cochlear implant artifact
Friesen, L. M., & Picton, T. W. (2009) · Hearing Research · doi:10.1016/j.heares.2009.10.012 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Cochlear implant artifact attenuation in late auditory evoked potentials: A single channel approach
Laughlin, M. M., Valdés, A. L., Reilly, R. B., & Zeng, F. (2013) · Hearing Research · doi:10.1016/j.heares.2013.05.006 · Cited by 61 · see citing works
Improved Electrically Evoked Auditory Steady-State Response Thresholds in Humans
Hofmann, M. H., & Wouters, J. M. (2012) · Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology · doi:10.1007/s10162-012-0321-8 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Self-citationBeamformer Suppression of Cochlear Implant Artifacts in an Electroencephalography Dataset
Wong, D. D. E., & Gordon, K. A. (2009) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2009.2029239 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Gransier, R., Deprez, H., Hofmann, M. H., et al. (2016) · Hearing Research · doi:10.1016/j.heares.2016.03.006 · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Self-citationDeprez, H., Gransier, R., Hofmann, M., Wieringen, A. V., Wouters, J. M., & Moonen, M. (2016) · Biomedical Signal Processing and Control · doi:10.1016/j.bspc.2016.07.013 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Self-citationSensitivity and Specificity of Averaged Electrode Voltage Measures in Cochlear Implant Recipients
Hughes, M. L., Brown, C., & Abbas, P. J. (2004) · Ear and Hearing · doi:10.1097/01.aud.0000145111.92825.cc · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Castañeda-Villa, N., & James, C. J. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/tbme.2010.2072957 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
Li, X., Nie, K., Karp, F., et al. (2010) · International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Informatics (BMEI) · doi:10.1109/bmei.2010.5639942 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Akhoun, I., McKay, C. M., & El‐Deredy, W. (2013) · Hearing Research · doi:10.1016/j.heares.2013.04.005 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Cochlear Implant Artifact Rejection In Electrically Evoked Auditory Steady State Responses
Deprez, H., Hofmann, M. H., Moonen, M., et al. (2014) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.43973 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- T. Zwolan, P. R. Kileny, C. Ashbaugh, and S. A. Telian, "Patient performance with the Cochlear Corporation '20+2' implant: bipolar vs monopolar activation," American Journal of Otolaryngology, vol. 17, no. 1996, pp. 717-723, 1996.
- T. W. Picton, M. S. John, A. Dimitrijevic, and D. Purcell, "Human auditory steady-state responses." International journal of audiology, vol. 42, no. 2012, pp. 177-219, 2003.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Advances in Neural Recording and Stimulation Integrated Circuits
Li, J., Liu, X., Mao, W., Chen, T., & Yu, H. (2021) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2021.663204 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
- Authors
- Deprez, H., Gransier, R., Hofmann, M., van Wieringen, A., Wouters, J., & Moonen, M.
- Affiliations
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Deprez, Hanne
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering
- Published
- 2017-08
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1322-1331
- ISSN
- 1534-4320 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0210
- OpenAlex
- W2545789585
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
- FWCI
- 0.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- lirias.kuleuven.be
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Lirias (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Funders
- Hermes Fund (141243)
- IWT (150432)
- FWO (G.066213)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
- Keywords
- template subtraction, artifact removal, linear interpolation, response latency, response amplitude
- MeSH terms
- Algorithms, Cochlear Implants, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Hearing Loss, Sensorineural, Humans, Sensitivity and Specificity, Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted, Reproducibility of Results, Artifacts
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
