Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36873452›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2023

Benchmarking performance of an automatic polysomnography scoring system in a population with suspected sleep disorders.

Bryan Peide Choo, Yingjuan Mok, Hong Choon Oh, Amiya Patanaik, Kishan Kishan, Animesh Awasthi, Siddharth Biju, Soumya Bhattacharjee, Yvonne Poh, Hang Siang Wong

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Artificial intelligence in the diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea: a scoping review.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Bryan Peide ChooHealth Services Research, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Yingjuan MokDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Hong Choon OhHealth Services Research, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Amiya PatanaikNeurobit Inc., New York, NY, United States.
Kishan KishanNeurobit Inc., New York, NY, United States.
Animesh AwasthiDepartment of Biotechnology, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India.
Siddharth BijuDepartment of Biotechnology, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India.
Soumya BhattacharjeeNational Center for Biological Sciences, Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bengaluru, India.
Yvonne PohDepartment of Sleep Medicine, Surgery and Science, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Hang Siang WongDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Changi General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Changi General Hospital · SGIndian Institute of Technology Kharagpur · INNational Centre for Biological Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: The current gold standard for measuring sleep disorders is polysomnography (PSG), which is manually scored by a sleep technologist. Scoring a PSG is time-consuming and tedious, with substantial inter-rater variability. A deep-learning-based sleep analysis software module can perform autoscoring of PSG. The primary objective of the study is to validate the accuracy and reliability of the autoscoring software. The secondary objective is to measure workflow improvements in terms of time and cost Methodology: The performance of an automatic PSG scoring software was benchmarked against the performance of two independent sleep technologists on PSG data collected from patients with suspected sleep disorders. The technologists at the hospital clinic and a third-party scoring company scored the PSG records independently. The scores were then compared between the technologists and the automatic scoring system. An observational study was also performed where the time taken for sleep technologists at the hospital clinic to manually score PSGs was tracked, along with the time taken by the automatic scoring software to assess for potential time savings. Results: Pearson's correlation between the manually scored apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and the automatically scored AHI was 0.962, demonstrating a near-perfect agreement. The autoscoring system demonstrated similar results in sleep staging. The agreement between automatic staging and manual scoring was higher in terms of accuracy and Cohen's kappa than the agreement between experts. The autoscoring system took an average of 42.7 s to score each record compared with 4,243 s for manual scoring. Following a manual review of the auto scores, an average time savings of 38.6 min per PSG was observed, amounting to 0.25 full-time equivalent (FTE) savings per year. Conclusion: The findings indicate a potential for a reduction in the burden of manual scoring of PSGs by sleep technologists and may be of operational significance for sleep laboratories in the healthcare setting.

Indexed as

AI sleep scoringautomatic sleep scoringmachine learningsleep-disordered breathingsleep staging

Identifiers

PMID36873452
PMCPMC9981786
OpenAlexW4321239646

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.