ArticleSleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society2024
Comparison analysis between standard polysomnographic data and in-ear-electroencephalography signals: a preliminary study.
Article in Sleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Progress in In-Ear EEG Technology and Its Emerging Real-World Applications: A Review.Micromachines · 2026Review
- A novel, wearable, in-ear EEG technology to assess sleep and daytime sleepiness.Bioelectronic medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluating the performance of wearable EEG sleep monitoring devices: a meta-analysis approach.npj biomedical innovations · 2025Article
- Forehead and In-Ear EEG Acquisition and Processing: Biomarker Analysis and Memory-Efficient Deep Learning Algorithm for Sleep Staging with Optimized Feature Dimensionality.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study Objectives: Polysomnography (PSG) currently serves as the benchmark for evaluating sleep disorders. Its discomfort makes long-term monitoring unfeasible, leading to bias in sleep quality assessment. Hence, less invasive, cost-effective, and portable alternatives need to be explored. One promising contender is the in-ear-electroencephalography (EEG) sensor. This study aims to establish a methodology to assess the similarity between the single-channel in-ear-EEG and standard PSG derivations. Methods: The study involves 4-hour signals recorded from 10 healthy subjects aged 18-60 years. Recordings are analyzed following two complementary approaches: (1) a hypnogram-based analysis aimed at assessing the agreement between PSG and in-ear-EEG-derived hypnograms; and (2) a feature- and analysis-based on time- and frequency-domain feature extraction, unsupervised feature selection, and definition of Feature-based Similarity Index via Jensen-Shannon Divergence (JSD-FSI). Results: We find large variability between PSG and in-ear-EEG hypnograms scored by the same sleep expert according to Cohen's kappa metric, with significantly greater agreements for PSG scorers than for in-ear-EEG scorers ( Conclusions: In-ear-EEG is a valuable solution for home-based sleep monitoring; however, further studies with a larger and more heterogeneous dataset are needed.
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.