Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24346125›Full record

ReviewPhysiological measurement2014

A review of signals used in sleep analysis.

A Roebuck, V Monasterio, E Gederi, M Osipov, J Behar, A Malhotra, T Penzel, G D Clifford

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Physiological measurement, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. A Review on Automated Sleep Study.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2024
    Review
  8. [Wearables in rheumatology].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Device-based and subjective measurements of sleep in children with cerebral palsy: a comparison of sleep diary, actigraphy, and bed sensor data.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2023
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

A RoebuckInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, Department of Engineering Science, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
V Monasterio
E Gederi
M Osipov
J Behar
A Malhotra
T Penzel
G D Clifford

Funding

Assessment of Upper Airway Mechanics Using Newer EMG TechniquesK24HL093218 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI MALHOTRA, ATUL · 2009 to 2013
$857k
NHLBI NIH HHS K24 HL093218Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 098461/Z/12/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article presents a review of signals used for measuring physiology and activity during sleep and techniques for extracting information from these signals. We examine both clinical needs and biomedical signal processing approaches across a range of sensor types. Issues with recording and analysing the signals are discussed, together with their applicability to various clinical disorders. Both univariate and data fusion (exploiting the diverse characteristics of the primary recorded signals) approaches are discussed, together with a comparison of automated methods for analysing sleep.

Indexed as

AnimalsHumansMonitoring, PhysiologicSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedSleep

Identifiers

PMID24346125
PMCPMC4024062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.