ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2026
Non-contact acoustic screening for sleep apnea: a subject-aware deep learning approach.
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo explore the feasibility of using camera-derived, non-contact audio synchronized with PSG for clinically relevant sleep-apnea classification, and to benchmark compact deep models under a subject-aware design using a previously unstudied, real-world dataset.
methodsThirty-two adults underwent simultaneous polysomnography (PSG) and camera-based non-contact audio recording. The synchronized audio segments were used to train and compare three compact deep-learning architectures (convolutional, attention-augmented, and transformer-based) under a subject-aware evaluation design that prevented identity leakage. Model performance and calibration were assessed at both segment and subject levels using standard statistical tests.
resultsSubject-level evaluation was based on a very small, imbalanced test set of six subjects (one positive). Within this limited yet previously unstudied local dataset, the CNN_trans model achieved an apparent perfect ranking performance (AUC = 1.00; 95% CI 0.00–1.00), though this likely reflects the small, imbalanced test cohort, with recall = 1.00 and precision = 0.55. The wide confidence interval reflects substantial statistical uncertainty, and DeLong comparisons showed no significant AUC difference between CNN_trans and CNN_att (ΔAUC = − 0.042; p = 0.43).
conclusionPSG-synchronized, non-contact audio supports accurate and well-calibrated sleep-apnea classification with compact deep models. This subject-aware evaluation suggests that contactless acoustic monitoring may have potential clinical relevance, motivating larger, multi-site validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41670793What 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.