Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30538591›Full record

ArticleNature and science of sleep2018

A novel in-ear sensor to determine sleep latency during the Multiple Sleep Latency Test in healthy adults with and without sleep restriction.

Yousef D Alqurashi, Takashi Nakamura, Valentin Goverdovsky, James Moss, Michael I Polkey, Danilo P Mandic, Mary J Morrell

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature and science of sleep, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A gradual and sustainable approach to diagnosing sleep and circadian disturbances in dementia.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Yousef D AlqurashiSleep and Ventilation Unit, Royal Brompton Campus, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, UK, y.alqurashi15@imperial.ac.uk.
Takashi NakamuraDepartment of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Communications and Signal Processing Group, Imperial College, London, UK.
Valentin GoverdovskyDepartment of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Communications and Signal Processing Group, Imperial College, London, UK.
James MossSleep and Ventilation Unit, Royal Brompton Campus, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, UK, y.alqurashi15@imperial.ac.uk.
Michael I PolkeyNational Institute for Health Research, Respiratory Disease Biomedical Research Unit at the Royal Brompton and Harefield National Health Service Foundation Trust and Imperial College, London, UK.
Danilo P MandicDepartment of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Communications and Signal Processing Group, Imperial College, London, UK.
Mary J MorrellSleep and Ventilation Unit, Royal Brompton Campus, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, UK, y.alqurashi15@imperial.ac.uk.
Imperial College London · GBNational Health Service · GBRoyal Brompton Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesDetecting sleep latency during the Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT) using electroencephalogram (scalp-EEG) is time-consuming. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of a novel in-ear sensor (in-ear EEG) to detect the sleep latency, compared to scalp-EEG, during MSLT in healthy adults, with and without sleep restriction.

methodsWe recruited 25 healthy adults (28.5±5.3 years) who participated in two MSLTs with simultaneous recording of scalp and in-ear EEG. Each test followed a randomly assigned sleep restriction (≤5 hours sleep) or usual night sleep (≥7 hours sleep). Reaction time and Stroop test were used to assess the functional impact of the sleep restriction. The EEGs were scored blind to the mode of measurement and study conditions, using American Academy of Sleep Medicine 2012 criteria. The Agreement between the scalp and in-ear EEG was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis.

resultsTechnically acceptable data were obtained from 23 adults during 69 out of 92 naps in the sleep restriction condition and 25 adults during 85 out of 100 naps in the usual night sleep. Meaningful sleep restrictions were confirmed by an increase in the reaction time (mean ± SD: 238±30 ms vs 228±27 ms;

conclusionThe in-ear sensor was able to detect reduced sleep latency following sleep restriction, which was sufficient to impair both the reaction time and cognitive function. Substantial agreement was observed between the scalp and in-ear EEG when measuring sleep latency. This new in-ear EEG technology is shown to have a significant value as a convenient measure for sleep latency.

Indexed as

electroencephalographyexcessive daytime sleepinessin-ear EEGmultiple sleep latency testsleep onsetsleep restriction

Identifiers

PMID30538591
PMCPMC6251456
OpenAlexW2901273231

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.