Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39735738›Full record

ArticleSleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society2024

Comparison analysis between standard polysomnographic data and in-ear-electroencephalography signals: a preliminary study.

Gianpaolo Palo, Luigi Fiorillo, Giuliana Monachino, Michal Bechny, Michel Wälti, Elias Meier, Francesca Pentimalli Biscaretti di Ruffia, Mark Melnykowycz, Athina Tzovara, Valentina Agostini and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Review
  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

11 authors.

Gianpaolo PaloDepartment of Innovative Technologies, Institute of Digital Technologies for Personalized Healthcare (MeDiTech), University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland.
Luigi FiorilloDepartment of Innovative Technologies, Institute of Digital Technologies for Personalized Healthcare (MeDiTech), University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7709-2933
Giuliana MonachinoDepartment of Innovative Technologies, Institute of Digital Technologies for Personalized Healthcare (MeDiTech), University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland.
Michal BechnyDepartment of Innovative Technologies, Institute of Digital Technologies for Personalized Healthcare (MeDiTech), University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland.
Michel WältiIDUN Technologies AG, Glattpark, Switzerland.
Elias MeierIDUN Technologies AG, Glattpark, Switzerland.
Francesca Pentimalli Biscaretti di RuffiaIDUN Technologies AG, Glattpark, Switzerland.
Mark MelnykowyczIDUN Technologies AG, Glattpark, Switzerland.
Athina TzovaraInstitute of Computer Science, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Valentina AgostiniDepartment of Electronics and Telecommunications, Politecnico di Torino, Torino, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5887-1499
Francesca Dalia FaraciDepartment of Innovative Technologies, Institute of Digital Technologies for Personalized Healthcare (MeDiTech), University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland, Lugano, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

in-ear-EEGmachine learningmultisource-scored sleep databasessleep stagingsleep wearables

Identifiers

PMID39735738
PMCPMC11672114

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.