Auditory Neuroscience Laboratory, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA; Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA.
Auditory Neuroscience Laboratory, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA; Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA; Department of Neurobiology, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA; Department of Otolaryngology, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA.
J Neurosci Methods. 2021 Oct 1;362:109290. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2021.109290. Epub 2021 Jul 15.
The frequency-following response, or FFR, is a neurophysiologic response that captures distinct aspects of sound processing. Like all evoked responses, FFR is susceptible to electric and myogenic noise contamination during collection. Click-evoked auditory brainstem response collection standards have been adopted for FFR collection, however, whether these standards sufficiently limit FFR noise contamination is unknown. Thus, a critical question remains: to what extent do distinct FFR components reflect noise contamination? This is especially relevant for prestimulus amplitude (i.e., activity preceding the evoked response), as this measure has been used to index both noise contamination and neural noise.
We performed two experiments. First, using >1000 young-adult FFRs, we ran regressions to determine the variance explained by myogenic and electrical noise, as indexed by artifact rejection count and electrode impedance, on each FFR component. Second, we reanalyzed prestimulus amplitude differences attributed to athletic experience and socioeconomic status, adding covariates of artifact rejection and impedance.
We found that non-neural noise marginally contributed to FFR components and could not explain group differences on prestimulus amplitude.
Prestimulus amplitude has been considered a measure of non-neural noise contamination. However, non-neural noise was not the sole contributor to variance in this measure and did not explain group differences.
Results from the two experiments suggest that the effects of non-neural noise on FFR components are minimal and do not obscure individual differences in the FFR and that prestimulus amplitude indexes neural noise.
频率跟随反应（FFR）是一种神经生理反应，可捕捉声音处理的不同方面。与所有诱发反应一样，FFR 在采集过程中容易受到电和肌源性噪声的污染。已经采用了 click-evoked auditory brainstem response 采集标准来采集 FFR，但这些标准是否足以限制 FFR 噪声污染尚不清楚。因此，一个关键问题仍然存在：不同的 FFR 成分在多大程度上反映了噪声污染？这对于刺激前振幅（即诱发反应之前的活动）尤为重要，因为该指标已被用于指示噪声污染和神经噪声。
我们进行了两项实验。首先，使用 >1000 个年轻成年人的 FFR，我们进行回归分析，以确定肌源性和电噪声（以 artifact rejection count 和 electrode impedance 为指标）对每个 FFR 成分的解释方差。其次，我们重新分析了归因于运动经验和社会经济地位的刺激前振幅差异，增加了 artifact rejection 和 impedance 的协变量。
我们发现非神经噪声对 FFR 成分的贡献微不足道，并且不能解释刺激前振幅的组间差异。
刺激前振幅曾被认为是衡量非神经噪声污染的指标。然而，非神经噪声不是该指标方差的唯一贡献者，也不能解释组间差异。
两项实验的结果表明，非神经噪声对 FFR 成分的影响很小，不会掩盖 FFR 中的个体差异，并且刺激前振幅指标是神经噪声。
