ArticleJournal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine2026
YASA automated sleep staging performance across seven nights of normal sleep and sleep restriction.
Article in Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesThis study aimed to compare YASA's automated sleep staging to manual staging in the context of a multi-night experimental sleep restriction protocol.
methodsSeventy-five adults (58% female; 57% nonwhite) participated in up to seven nights of laboratory-based polysomnography measurements. The study involved one adaptation night, followed by three nights of normal sleep (9 h time in bed) and three nights of sleep restriction (5.5 h time in bed). Condition order was counterbalanced. Manual sleep staging was performed by a registered polysomnographic technician. Sleep data were exported and processed using Python 3.12, MNE 1.8.0, and YASA 0.6.5 for automated sleep staging.
resultsAcross 483 valid sleep nights, there was 82.9% overall agreement between YASA scoring and manual scoring. Stage-specific agreement was 40.3% (N1), 85.1% (N2), 86.9% (N3), and 78.7% (REM). Agreement was higher during normal sleep nights than sleep restriction nights, particularly for wake, N1, and REM sleep classifications.
conclusionsYASA-based staging exhibited good overall agreement with manual scoring during normal sleep nights. However, caution is needed when interpreting N1 estimates, as well as in interpreting data during short sleep nights. CURRENT KNOWLEDGE/STUDY RATIONALE: Sleep stage scoring is typically conducted manually by at least one experienced technician, but this process is laborious and subject to biases. This study investigated whether a machine-learning-based open tool-YASA-could automatically stage polysomnography data with acceptable accuracy. STUDY IMPACT: Across 430,813 epochs, YASA showed acceptable accuracy in sleep staging, making it an efficient tool for the sleep community. However, caution is still needed for some applications, such as interpreting YASA's N1 estimates as well as data from short sleep nights.
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.