Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36812563›Full record

ArticlePLOS digital health2022

Repeated automatic sleep scoring based on ear-EEG is a valuable alternative to manually scored polysomnography.

Troels Wesenberg Kjaer, Mike Lind Rank, Martin Christian Hemmsen, Preben Kidmose, Kaare Mikkelsen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS digital health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Troels Wesenberg KjaerVisiting professor, Department of Neuroscience, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2105-6199
Mike Lind RankT&W Engineering, Lynge, Denmark.
Martin Christian HemmsenT&W Engineering, Lynge, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3899-8710
Preben KidmoseDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8628-8057
Kaare MikkelsenDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7360-8629
Aarhus University · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While polysomnography (PSG) is the gold standard to quantify sleep, modern technology allows for new alternatives. PSG is obtrusive, affects the sleep it is set out to measure and requires technical assistance for mounting. A number of less obtrusive solutions based on alternative methods have been introduced, but few have been clinically validated. Here we validate one of these solutions, the ear-EEG method, against concurrently recorded PSG in twenty healthy subjects each measured for four nights. Two trained technicians scored the 80 nights of PSG independently, while an automatic algorithm scored the ear-EEG. The sleep stages and eight sleep metrics (Total Sleep Time (TST), Sleep Onset Latency, Sleep Efficiency, Wake After Sleep Onset, REM latency, REM fraction of TST, N2 fraction of TST, and N3 fraction of TST) were used in the further analysis. We found the sleep metrics: Total Sleep Time, Sleep Onset Latency, Sleep Efficiency, Wake After Sleep Onset were estimated with high accuracy and precision between automatic sleep scoring and manual sleep scoring. However, the REM latency and REM fraction of sleep showed high accuracy but low precision. Further, the automatic sleep scoring systematically overestimated the N2 fraction of sleep and slightly underestimated the N3 fraction of sleep. We demonstrate that sleep metrics estimated from automatic sleep scoring based on repeated ear-EEG in some cases are more reliably estimated with repeated nights of automatically scored ear-EEG than with a single night of manually scored PSG. Thus, given the obtrusiveness and cost of PSG, ear-EEG seems to be a useful alternative for sleep staging for the single night recording and an advantageous choice for several nights of sleep monitoring.

Identifiers

PMID36812563
PMCPMC9931275
OpenAlexW4307442030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.