ArticleFrontiers in sleep2023
Deep learning for sleep analysis on children with sleep-disordered breathing: Automatic detection of mouth breathing events.
Article in Frontiers in sleep, 2023. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) can range from habitual snoring to severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). A common characteristic of SDB in children is mouth breathing, yet it is commonly overlooked and inconsistently diagnosed. The primary aim of this study is to construct a deep learning algorithm in order to automatically detect mouth breathing events in children from polysomnography (PSG) recordings. Methods: The PSG of 20 subjects aged 10-13 years were used, 15 of which had reported snoring or presented high snoring and/or high OSA values by scoring conducted by a sleep technologist, including mouth breathing events. The separately measured mouth and nasal pressure signals from the PSG were fed through convolutional neural networks to identify mouth breathing events. Results: The finalized model presented 93.5% accuracy, 97.8% precision, 89% true positive rate, and 2% false positive rate when applied to the validation data that was set aside from the training data. The model's performance decreased when applied to a second validation data set, indicating a need for a larger training set. Conclusion: The results show the potential of deep neural networks in the analysis and classification of biological signals, and illustrates the usefulness of machine learning in sleep analysis.
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.