The nonstationary nature of INS also raises the question of which data from a recording session should be analyzed. One approach, familiar to engineers, is to apply some form of time series analysis to the entire record. This approach assumes that the results of some experimental manipulation or clinical intervention, to be significant, must affect the major components of the signal. An example of this was the comparison by Roberti et al.
51 of spectral analysis and intensity calculation in evaluating several surgical approaches to treating INS. Their justification for the “whole of signal” approach can be found in their statement, “We regarded each signal recording as a realization of a stochastic process, supposed stationary at least to the second moment. In fact, different samples of signal recorded at different times, for the same patient and angular position, resemble each other only in their average properties, owing to the presence of noise and small random changes in the nystagmus waveform pattern.”
51 They identified the peak of the power spectrum and used its amplitude and frequency, as well as evaluation of the power plot, to characterize the effects of nystagmus surgery. Similarly, Miura et al.
30 operated on the entire recorded datasets, averaging the log ratio of the wavelet spectra in a 4- to 10-minute “fixation” recording. There are several problems with doing this when evaluating the effects of an intervention. First, as noted by Roberti et al.,
51 is the unavoidable presence of noise in the recording, both intrinsic to the recording system and arising from blinks, facial motion, and the like. Furthermore, by operating on the entire recording, the effects on the signal of changes in the fixating eye (in strabismic patients), of losses of fixation and of lapses in attention are not separated out. When a task consists of gazing at a target for minutes on end, these are all common, real influences on the nature of the nystagmus waveform. Blinks and inattention, shown in
Figures 7 8 and 10 , are also frequently present in INS data. These contaminants of the signal are extremely likely to affect the outcome of any sort of global analysis far more than would an increase in the duration of foveation periods, which constitute in many patients only a small percentage of the total signal. Thus, averaging segments containing these artifacts would include data with no functional (foveation) importance.