ArticleClocks & sleep2020
Validation of an Automatic Arousal Detection Algorithm for Whole-Night Sleep EEG Recordings.
Article in Clocks & sleep, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of using AI-enabled technology in sleep medicine: a commentary.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2024Review
- Frontal grey matter microstructure is associated with sleep slow waves characteristics in late midlife.Sleep · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Arousals during sleep are transient accelerations of the EEG signal, considered to reflect sleep perturbations associated with poorer sleep quality. They are typically detected by visual inspection, which is time consuming, subjective, and prevents good comparability across scorers, studies and research centres. We developed a fully automatic algorithm which aims at detecting artefact and arousal events in whole-night EEG recordings, based on time-frequency analysis with adapted thresholds derived from individual data. We ran an automated detection of arousals over 35 sleep EEG recordings in healthy young and older individuals and compared it against human visual detection from two research centres with the aim to evaluate the algorithm performance. Comparison across human scorers revealed a high variability in the number of detected arousals, which was always lower than the number detected automatically. Despite indexing more events, automatic detection showed high agreement with human detection as reflected by its correlation with human raters and very good Cohen's kappa values. Finally, the sex of participants and sleep stage did not influence performance, while age may impact automatic detection, depending on the human rater considered as gold standard. We propose our freely available algorithm as a reliable and time-sparing alternative to visual detection of arousals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.