ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2025
Performance of an Electroencephalography-Measuring Headband or Actigraphy Compared with Polysomnography in Older Adults with Sleep Disturbances.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study Objectives: In older adults, self-reported sleep measures may be inaccurate, but polysomnography (PSG) is burdensome. We assessed the performance of an electroencephalography-measuring headband (HB) or actigraphy (ACT) compared with PSG in older adults with sleep disturbances. Methods: Sixty-three adults aged ≥60 years who reported symptoms of insomnia and/or daytime sleepiness ≥once/week completed a week-long, home-based protocol during which they wore the HB for seven nights, an actigraph for seven days and nights, and completed a one-night level II unattended PSG. For the current analysis, we compared total sleep time (TST) and wake after sleep onset (WASO) from all three devices on the PSG night. We calculated absolute differences and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for TST and WASO between HB and ACT, respectively, vs. PSG. We also evaluated the performance of the HB among subgroups of the poorest sleepers according to the presence of sleep apnea, insomnia, poor sleep quality, and periodic limb movements of sleep. Feasibility of the HB was assessed by measures of adherence (i.e., ability to use the HB over seven nights) and usability (i.e., ratings of items from the WEarable Acceptability Range [WEAR] scale). Results: The average age was 72.8 [standard deviation 6.6] years, 63.5% were female, and 63.5% identified as non-Hispanic White. On PSG, averages for TST and WASO were 370.1 [93] and 88.9 [63] minutes, respectively. For the HB vs. PSG, mean differences and ICCs were -11.9 minutes and 0.83 [0.74, 0.89] for TST; and -15.5 minutes and 0.65 [0.48, 0.77] for WASO. For ACT vs. PSG, mean differences for TST and WASO were larger, and ICCs showed lower levels of agreement. The HB performed well among the poorest sleepers, with ICCs >0.65 for TST and WASO. On average, participants wore the HB for 6.5 [0.8] nights, and usability was rated highly. Conclusions: The HB demonstrated good agreement with PSG, outperforming ACT, including among the poorest sleepers. Devices like the HB might provide feasible measures of sleep that are more accurate than ACT and enhance the management of sleep health in older adults with sleep disturbances. Future research should focus on further validation of these devices in habitual sleep environments.
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.