This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

John H. Noseworthy, MD; John Miller, MD; Thomas J. Murray, MD, FRCP(C)
Department of Medicine

David M. Regan, DSc, PhD
Department of Physiology and Biophysics Gerard Hall Halifax Infirmary Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada B3H 4H7

Arch Neurol. 1982;39(4):257-258.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In Reply.—

Dr Shubert points out correctly that stimulus intensity affects BAER wave latency, and this is indeed a possible confounding factor in many BAER studies. With this in mind, we used the same method of setting stimulus intensity for patients and control subjects. To minimize the audiometric differences between different subjects and to guard against possible errors in instrumental calibration, we set all intensities at a fixed number of decibels about the individual subject's auditory thresholds and measured the subjective threshold at the start of each session. Dr Shubert's suggestion that our findings might be due to differences in stimulus intensity implies that we would have used a lower stimulus level for the patient group than for the subject group, and although this cannot be ruled out, it is difficult to see how it may have happened.

Our article (ARCHIVES 1981;38:275-278) emphasizes that only a group difference was found, and the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?