ArticleBiomedical engineering online2025
Alertness assessment by optical stimulation-induced brainwave entrainment through machine learning classification.
Article in Biomedical engineering online, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlertness plays a crucial role in the completion of important tasks. However, application of existing methods for evaluating alertness is limited due to issues such as high subjectivity, practice effect, susceptibility to interference, and complexity in data collection. Currently, there is an urgent need for a rapid, quantifiable, and easily implementable alertness assessment method.
methodsTwelve optical stimulation frequencies ranged from 4 to 48 Hz were chosen to induce brainwave entrainment (BWE) for 30 s, respectively, in 40 subjects. Electroencephalogram (EEG) were recorded at the prefrontal pole electrodes Fpz, Fp1, and Fp2. Karolinska Sleepiness Scale, psychomotor vigilance test and β band power in resting EEG, were used to evaluate the alertness level before and after optical stimulation-induced BWE. The correlation between nine EEG features during the BWE and different alertness states were analyzed. Next, machine learning models including support vector machine, Naive Bayes and logistic regression were employed to conduct integrated analysis on the EEG features with significant differences.
resultsWe found that BWE intensity, β band power, and γ band power exhibit significant differences across different states of alertness. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of individual features for classifying alertness states was between 0.62-0.83. To further improve classification efficacy, these three features were used as input parameters in machine learning models. We found that Naive Bayes model showed the best classification efficacy in 30 Hz optical stimulation, with AUC reaching 0.90, an average accuracy of 0.90, an average sensitivity of 0.89, and an average specificity of 0.90. Meanwhile, we observed that the subjects' alertness levels did not change significantly before and after optical stimulation-induced BWE.
conclusionsOur study demonstrated that the use of machine learning to integrate EEG features during 30 s optical stimulation-induced BWE showed promising classification capabilities for alertness states. It provided a rapid, quantifiable, and easily implementable alertness assessment option.
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.