ArticleNature and science of sleep2024
Bridging AI and Clinical Practice: Integrating Automated Sleep Scoring Algorithm with Uncertainty-Guided Physician Review.
Article in Nature and science of sleep, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comorbidity Classification from Clinical Free-Text using Large Language Models: Application to Sleep Disorder Patients.Journal of medical systems · 2026Article
- Beyond Algorithms: The Case for Standardized Reporting in AI Sleep Scoring.Nature and science of sleep · 2026Article
- SLEEPYLAND: trust begins with fair evaluation of automatic sleep staging models.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Deciphering Insomnia: Benchmarking Automated Sleep Staging Algorithms for Complex Sleep Disorders.Journal of sleep research · 2025Article
- Beyond accuracy: a framework for evaluating algorithmic bias and performance, applied to automated sleep scoring.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Artificial Intelligence in Sleep Medicine: The Dawn of a New Era.Nature and science of sleep · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to enhance the clinical use of automated sleep-scoring algorithms by incorporating an uncertainty estimation approach to efficiently assist clinicians in the manual review of predicted hypnograms, a necessity due to the notable inter-scorer variability inherent in polysomnography (PSG) databases. Our efforts target the extent of review required to achieve predefined agreement levels, examining both in-domain (ID) and out-of-domain (OOD) data, and considering subjects' diagnoses. Patients and Methods: A total of 19,578 PSGs from 13 open-access databases were used to train U-Sleep, a state-of-the-art sleep-scoring algorithm. We leveraged a comprehensive clinical database of an additional 8832 PSGs, covering a full spectrum of ages (0-91 years) and sleep-disorders, to refine the U-Sleep, and to evaluate different uncertainty-quantification approaches, including our novel confidence network. The ID data consisted of PSGs scored by over 50 physicians, and the two OOD sets comprised recordings each scored by a unique senior physician. Results: U-Sleep demonstrated robust performance, with Cohen's kappa (K) at 76.2% on ID and 73.8-78.8% on OOD data. The confidence network excelled at identifying uncertain predictions, achieving AUROC scores of 85.7% on ID and 82.5-85.6% on OOD data. Independently of sleep-disorder status, statistical evaluations revealed significant differences in confidence scores between aligning vs discording predictions, and significant correlations of confidence scores with classification performance metrics. To achieve κ ≥ 90% with physician intervention, examining less than 29.0% of uncertain epochs was required, substantially reducing physicians' workload, and facilitating near-perfect agreement. Conclusion: Inter-scorer variability limits the accuracy of the scoring algorithms to ~80%. By integrating an uncertainty estimation with U-Sleep, we enhance the review of predicted hypnograms, to align with the scoring taste of a responsible physician. Validated across ID and OOD data and various sleep-disorders, our approach offers a strategy to boost automated scoring tools' usability in clinical settings.
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.