ArticleScientific reports2024
An ensemble method for improving robustness against the electrode contact problems in automated sleep stage scoring.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In-home automated scoring systems are in high demand; however, the current systems are not widely adopted in clinical settings. Problems with electrode contact and restriction on measurable signals often result in unstable and inaccurate scoring for clinical use. To address these issues, we propose a method based on ensemble of small sleep stage scoring models with different input signal sets. By excluding models that employ problematic signals from the voting process, our method can mitigate the effects of electrode contact failure. Comparative experiments demonstrated that our method could reduce the impact of contact problems and improve scoring accuracy for epochs with problematic signals by 8.3 points, while also decreasing the deterioration in scoring accuracy from 7.9 to 0.3 points compared to typical methods. Additionally, we confirmed that assigning different input sets to small models did not diminish the advantages of the ensemble but instead increased its efficacy. The proposed model can improve overall scoring accuracy and minimize the effect of problematic signals simultaneously, making in-home sleep stage scoring systems more suitable for clinical practice.
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.