Purpose
Miniaturization of digital technologies has created new opportunities for remote health care and neuroscientific fieldwork. The current study assesses comparisons between in-home auditory brainstem response (ABR) recordings and recordings obtained in a traditional lab setting.
Method
Click-evoked and speech-evoked ABRs were recorded in 12 normal-hearing, young adult participants over three test sessions in (a) a shielded sound booth within a research lab, (b) a simulated home environment, and (c) the research lab once more. The same single-family house was used for all home testing.
Results
Analyses of ABR latencies, a common clinical metric, showed high repeatability between the home and lab environments across both the click-evoked and speech-evoked ABRs. Like ABR latencies, response consistency and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were robust both in the lab and in the home and did not show significant differences between locations, although variability between the home and lab was higher than latencies, with two participants influencing this lower repeatability between locations. Response consistency and SNR also patterned together, with a trend for higher SNRs to pair with more consistent responses in both the home and lab environments.
Conclusions
Our findings demonstrate the feasibility of obtaining high-quality ABR recordings within a simulated home environment that closely approximate those recorded in a more traditional recording environment. This line of work may open doors to greater accessibility to underserved clinical and research populations.
