MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158935576 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsab072.270

271 Sleep staging performance of a signal-agnostic cloud-based real-time sleep analytics platform

2021· article· en· W3158935576 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhao Siting, Kishan Kishan, Amiya Patanaik

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolysomnographyElectroencephalographySleep (system call)Computer scienceWearable computerSleep StagesElectrooculographyArtificial intelligenceMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationEye movementEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction The coronavirus pandemic has brought unprecedented changes to the health care system, including sleep medicine. Remote monitoring and telemedicine played a significant role in this shift. We anticipate these changes to continue in the future with internet-connected wearables (ICWs) playing an important role in measuring and managing sleep remotely. As these ICWs measures a small subset of signals traditionally measured during polysomnography (PSG), manual sleep staging becomes non-trivial and sometimes impossible. The ability to do accurate and reliable automatic sleep staging using different modalities of physiological signals remotely is becoming ever more important. Methods The current work seeks to quantify the sleep staging performance of Z3Score-Neo (https://z3score.com, Neurobit Technologies, Singapore), a signal agnostic, cloud-based real-time sleep analytics platform. We tested its staging performance on the CINC open dataset with N=994 subjects using various combinations of signals including Electroencephalogram (EEG), Electrooculogram (EOG), Electromyogram (EMG), and Instantaneous Heart Rate (IHR) derived from Electrocardiogram (ECG). The staging was compared against manual scoring based on PSG. For IHR based staging, N1 and N2 were combined. Results We achieved substantial agreement (all Cohen’s Kappa > 0.7) between automatic and manual staging using various combinations of EEG, EOG and EMG channels with accuracies varying between 81.76% (two central EEGs, one EOG, one EMG), 79.31% (EEG+EOG), 78.73% (EEG only) and 78.09% (one EOG). We achieved moderate agreement (accuracy: 72.8% κ=0.54) with IHR derived from ECG. Conclusion Our results demonstrated the accuracy of a cloud-based sleep analytics platform on an open dataset, using various combinations of ecologically valid physiological signals. EOG and EMG channels can be easily self-administered using sticker-based electrodes and can be added to existing home sleep apnea test (HSAT) kits significantly improving their utility. ICWs are already capable of accurately measuring EEG/EOG (Muse, InteraXon Inc., Toronto, Canada; Dreem band, Dreem, USA) and IHR derived from ECG (Movesense, Suunto, Finland) or photoplethysmogram (Oura Ring, Oura Health Oy, Finland) or through non-contact ballistocardiogram/radio-based measurements (Dozee, Turtle Shell Technologies, India; Sleepiz, Sleepiz AG, Switzerland). Therefore, a well-validated cloud-based staging platform solves a major technological hurdle towards the proliferation of remote monitoring and telehealth in sleep medicine. Support (if any):

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207