1998
DOI: 10.3758/bf03209494
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A computer program for automated scoring of exteroceptive suppression periods

Abstract: Exteroceptive suppression (ES)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2000
2000

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In our large sample of carefully diagnosed CTTH patients we did not observe the abnormalities in ES2 responses observed by some (1416), but not by other investigators (11, 12, 18, 19). This is despite the fact that our methodology for the assessment of ES2 parameters closely followed the recommendations of a consensus panel of the European Headache Federation and utilized a computerized scoring system to eliminate the possibility of scoring bias (29).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In our large sample of carefully diagnosed CTTH patients we did not observe the abnormalities in ES2 responses observed by some (1416), but not by other investigators (11, 12, 18, 19). This is despite the fact that our methodology for the assessment of ES2 parameters closely followed the recommendations of a consensus panel of the European Headache Federation and utilized a computerized scoring system to eliminate the possibility of scoring bias (29).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Individual 250‐ms sweeps of EMG activity associated with each of the 10 stimulation trials were rectified and averaged online. ES suppression periods were automatically scored and ES parameters were calculated using a computer program ( 29). Briefly, the program first expressed the rectified and averaged signal as a percentage of the prestimulus baseline (defined as the mean level of EMG activity between −75.0 ms and −25.0 ms before electrical stimulation).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These samples were averaged together and scored by a computer scoring system developed for this purpose. 30 The duration of ES2 at 50% suppression and the ES2 area under the 50% suppression level were both scored and analyzed separately, as there is evidence that these two measures can yield somewhat different results. 31 The area of ES2 was cal-culated in squared quantization units (a product of the sampling frequency and amplitude resolution), combining both the duration and the depth of the suppression in one metric.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%