ArticleSleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society2026
Automated sleep stage and event detection algorithms using quality-controlled polysomnography annotations.
Article in Sleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Study Objectives: To develop machine learning models for sleep stage classification, arousal detection, and respiratory event detection from overnight polysomnography, and to evaluate their performance relative to expert scorers. Methods: Overnight polysomnography recordings were obtained from healthy participants and participants referred for suspected sleep-disordered breathing. Four certified scorers completed calibration sessions and generated reference annotations for sleep stages, arousals, and respiratory events. A subset of recordings was independently annotated by all scorers to support consensus analyses, enabling direct comparison between model outputs and human inter-scorer agreement. Gradient-boosted decision tree models were trained using hand-crafted features derived from standard physiological signals. Results: Sleep stage classification achieved an accuracy of 0.840, a Cohen's kappa of 0.791, and an F1-score of 0.841, with limits of agreement for total sleep time of approximately ±0.5 h. Arousal detection achieved an F1-score of 0.733, with limits of agreement for the arousal index of approximately ±15 events/h. Respiratory event detection achieved an F1-score of 0.818, with limits of agreement for the apnea-hypopnea index also within approximately ±15 events/h. In consensus analyses, model performance was comparable to human inter-scorer agreement for sleep stages and arousals, while remaining below human inter-scorer agreement for respiratory events, despite high absolute performance relative to prior studies. Conclusions: The proposed models achieved performance approaching human-level agreement across major sleep scoring tasks. These findings indicate that high consistency in expert annotations is a key factor underlying robust model performance and support the use of quality-controlled annotations for developing reliable automated sleep analysis systems.
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.