Skip to main content
Log in

On the statistical significance of electrophysiological steady-state responses

  • Published:
Documenta Ophthalmologica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Steady-state stimulation is a useful paradigm in many physiologic and clinical situations, for ERG, Pattern-ERG and VEP. One of the advantages is the easy evaluation of the response via Fourier analysis. However, the question whether a given response is statistically significant or not has received little attention so far, although it is especially relevant in high noise, low amplitude recordings, as often occur in pathologic conditions. A given response is statistically significant if it is unlikely that its value is due to noise fluctuations. Thus appropriate estimates of noise and response are required. We have analytically derived formulas for the statistical significance of a given signal-to-noise-ratio s, based on two different estimates of noise: (1) Noise estimate by a `no stimulus' recording, or by a `±average'. The former needs an additional recording, the latter can simultaneously be calculated as the standard average. (2) Noise is estimated as the average of the two neighboring spectral lines (one below, and one above the response frequency). Analytical solutions were obtained for both noise estimates that can easily be evaluated in all appropriate recordings. Noise estimate (1) performs much poorer than noise estimate (2), as can be seen from the following landmark values: Typical significance levels of 5%, 1%, and 0.1% require s values of 4.36, 9.95, and 31.6 (1), and 2.82, 4.55, and 8.40 (2). The noise estimate based on the neighboring frequencies can be easily applied after recording, provided that the noise spectrum is reasonably smooth around the response and frequency-overspill was avoided. It allows a quantitative assessment of low responses in physiological threshold analyses and pathological conditions, e.g., `submicrovolt flicker-ERG'.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Alberhseim WJ. A closed-form approximation to Robertson's detection characteristics. Proc IEEE 1981; 69: 839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bach M, Gerling J. Retinal and cortical activity in human subjects during color flicker fusion. Vision Res 1992; 32: 1219–23.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bach M, Rupp V, Meigen T. Yet another VEP-based visual acuity test. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci (ARVO Suppl.) 1998; 39: S184 (Number 879).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Birch DG, Sandberg MA. Submicrovolt full-field cone electroretinograms: artifacts and reproducibility. Doc Ophthalmol 1997; 92: 269-80.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Harding GFA, Odom JV, Spileers W, Spekreijse H. Standard for visual evoked potentials. Vision Res 1996; 36: 3567–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kusel R, Wesemann W, Rassow B. A new laser interferometer for the stimulation of pattern-reversal visual evoked potentials. Clin Phys Physiol Meas 1985; 6(3): 239–46.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Marmor MF, Holder GE, Porciatti V, Trick GL, Zrenner E. Guidelines for basic pattern electroretinography. Recommendations by the International Society for Clinical Electrophysiology of Vision. Doc Ophthalmol 1996; 91: 291–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Marmor MF, Zrenner E. Standard for clinical electrophysiology. Doc Ophthalmol 1995; 89: 199–210.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Mast J, Victor JD. Fluctuations of steady-state VEPs: interaction of driven evoked potentials and the EEG. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 1991; 78: 389–401.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Morrone C, Porciatti V, Fiorentini A, Burr DC. Pattern-reversal electroretinogram in response to chromatic stimuli: I. Humans. Visual Neurosci 1994; 11: 861–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Norcia AM, Tyler CW, Hamer RD, Wesemann W. Measurement of spatial contrast sensitivity with the swept contrast VEP. Vision Res 1989; 29: 627–37.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Papoulis A. Probability, random variables, and stochastic processes. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Regan D. A study of the visual system by the correlation of light stimuli and evoked electrical responses. Ph.D. thesis, University of London, 1964.

  14. Regan D. Some characteristics of average steady-state and transient responses evoked by modulated light. Electroencephal Clin Neurophysiol 1966; 20: 238–48.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Regan D. Human brain electrophysiology. Evoked potentials and evoked magnetic fields in science and medicine. New York, Amsterdam, London: Elsevier, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Rice SO. Statistical properties of a sine wave plus random noise. The Bell System Tech J 1948; 27: 109–57.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Robertson GH. Operating characteristics for a linear detector of CW signals in narrowband gaussian noise. The Bell System Tech J 1967; 46: 755–74.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Schimmel H.The (±)-reference: Accuracy of estimated mean components in average response studies. Science 1967; 157: 92–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sieving PA, Arnold EB, Jamison J, Liepa A, Coats C. Submicrovolt flicker electroretinogram: Cycle-by-cycle recording of multiple harmonics with statistical estimation of measurement uncertainty. Inv Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1998; 39: 1462–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Simon F, Rassow B. Measurements of spatial interaction and visual acuity using visual evoked potentials elicited by simultaneous multifrequency stimulation. Clin Vision Sci 1986; 1: 287–302.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Strasburger H. The analysis of steady state evoked potentials revisited. Clin Vision Sci 1987; 1: 245–56.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Strasburger H, Murray IJ, Remky A. Sustained and transient mechanisms in the steadystate visual evoked potential: Onset presentation compared to pattern reversal. Clin. Vision Sci. 1993: 8: 211–34.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Victor JD. Mast J. A new statistic for steady-state evoked potentials. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 1991; 78: 378–88

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Meigen, T., Bach, M. On the statistical significance of electrophysiological steady-state responses. Doc Ophthalmol 98, 207–232 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002097208337

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002097208337