{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017543859649122806, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002105263157894737, 'mean_word_length': 5.0423728813559325, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[The identification of wave I in ABR, ear-canal electrode and electrocochleography].

The diagnosis value of auditory brainstem response (ABR) lies in the fact that they make possible to measure the times conduction of the pathway from the cochlea to the topo part of the brainstem, enabling the diagnosis in an objective way of hearing deficits and their classifying as well. The analysis of the times of conduction are based on the measuring of the latency of waves and the interwave intervals, being fundamental the latency of waves I and V and the interval between them (I-V). But sometimes the registrations of ABR, obtained at intensities nearing hearing threshold or in many patients with significant hearing loss obtained through the traditional method from the scalp, do not permit as the identification of wave I, which causes a reduction in the value of ABR diagnosis. Our work tries to analyze the different techniques which could solve that reduction. To achieve it we have to compare the registrations of ABR obtained from the scalp to those obtained using a EAR canal electrode and to Auditory Nerve Action Potential obtained through Transtympanic Electrocochleography, analyzing the latency, the amplitudes and the intervals of the different waves and specially the growth in the amplitude of wave I, and the subsequent improvement given back to ABR all their diagnosis value.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)