ArticleJournal of sleep research2025
Deciphering Insomnia: Benchmarking Automated Sleep Staging Algorithms for Complex Sleep Disorders.
Article in Journal of sleep research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fully-automated sleep staging for Parkinson's disease and isolated REM sleep behavior disorder.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Deciphering Insomnia: Benchmarking Automated Sleep Staging Algorithms for Complex Sleep Disorders.Journal of sleep research · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Polysomnography (PSG) is essential for diagnosing sleep disorders, but its manual interpretation is labor-intensive. Automated sleep staging algorithms are promising, yet their utility in complex sleep disorders such as insomnia remains uncertain. This study evaluates five of the most recognised sleep staging classifiers-U-Sleep, STAGES, GSSC, Luna and YASA-on PSG data from 904 patients with chronic insomnia. Performance was assessed using F1 scores, confusion matrices and predicted sleep metrics. The effect of demographics, sleepiness and PSG metrics on each classifier's performance was assessed using linear regression. Across all sleep stages, GSSC performed best (macro F1 score = 0.66), followed by U-Sleep (0.62), Luna (0.56), STAGES (0.54) and YASA (0.52). GSSC achieved the highest F1 scores in Wake (0.83), N1 (0.22), N2 (0.80), N3 (0.71) and REM (0.76), while U-Sleep matched its performance in N1 and REM and Luna in N3. STAGES performed poorest in N3 (0.39) and YASA in REM (0.35). Common misclassifications included N1 vs. Wake/N2 and N3 vs. N2, with REM misclassified as Wake/N1/N2 by STAGES, Luna and YASA. GSSC and U-Sleep exhibited minimal demographic bias, while STAGES and Luna had more. No performance difference was observed between chronic insomnia patients with and without abnormal PSG. Sleep metric accuracy was highest for U-Sleep (TST, R
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.