ArticleNeuroinformatics2026
Meta-Analysis of Face-Validity Indicators in Automatically Detected Dog Sleep Spindles.
Article in Neuroinformatics, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual inspection as the golden standard for sleep spindle detection has received mixed support and may not be equally viable across species and experimental conditions. Here we propose a novel intermediate strategy for approximating the quality of a detector and subject our own algorithm for spindle detection in dogs to the procedure. Automatic detections across the full range of our data (excluding only data sets with high subject overlap) were analyzed for their compliance with three face validity criteria, originally discovered by expert scorers in human EEG. These criteria are the shortness of the events (mostly below 2 s, maximum 6), the distribution of faster (> 13 Hz) spindles along the midline (higher in central and posterior derivations) and an association between amplitude and negative chirp (positive for sleep spindles and mostly unrelated for other oscillations). All three criteria were observed in the majority of data sets and sampling events (subsets of data defined by condition and/or recording channel). Replication was more consistent for data sets than for sampling events, but combined probabilities (Fisher's method) always favoured face validity compliance. Our results indicate that automatic detections in the dog, which were shown in the past to display similar to humans associations with age and cognition, also share face validity criteria with human spindles. This strengthens the dog as a model in sleep spindle research and offers additional arguments for the quality of our detection method.
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.