Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34275069›Full record

ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2021

Detection of microsleep states from the EEG: a comparison of feature reduction methods.

Sudhanshu S D P Ayyagari, Richard D Jones, Stephen J Weddell

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sudhanshu S D P AyyagariDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Richard D JonesDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. richard.jones@nzbri.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2287-3358
Stephen J WeddellDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
University of Canterbury · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microsleeps are brief lapses in consciousness with complete suspension of performance. They are the cause of fatal accidents in many transport sectors requiring sustained attention, especially driving. A microsleep-warning device, using wireless EEG electrodes, could be used to rouse a user from an imminent microsleep. High-dimensional datasets, especially in EEG-based classification, present challenges as there are often a large number of potentially useful features for detecting the phenomenon of interest. Thus, it is often important to reduce the dimension of the original data prior to training the classifier. In this study, linear dimensionality reduction methods-principal component analysis (PCA) and probabilistic PCA (PPCA)-were compared with eight non-linear dimensionality reduction methods (kernel PCA, classical multi-dimensional scaling, isometric mapping, nearest neighbour estimation, stochastic neighbourhood embedding, autoencoder, stochastic proximity embedding, and Laplacian eigenmaps) on previously collected behavioural and EEG data from eight healthy non-sleep-deprived volunteers performing a 1D-visuomotor tracking task for 1 h. The effectiveness of the feature reduction algorithms was evaluated by visual inspection of class separation on 3D scatterplots, by trustworthiness scores, and by microsleep detection performance on a stacked-generalisation-based linear discriminant analysis (LDA) system estimating the microsleep/responsive state at 1 Hz based on the reduced features. On trustworthiness, PPCA outperformed PCA, but PCA outperformed all of the non-linear techniques. The trustworthiness score for each feature reduction method also correlated strongly with microsleep-state detection performance, providing strong validation of the ability of trustworthiness to estimate the relative effectiveness of feature reduction approaches, in terms of predicting performance, and ability to do so independently of the gold standard. Graphical abstract Proposed microsleep detection system.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsElectroencephalographyAttentionDiscriminant AnalysisHumansPrincipal Component AnalysisClassificationDetectionEEGFeature reductionMicrosleeps

Identifiers

PMID34275069
OpenAlexW3183391249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.