MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4232022570 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14648952.v1

Automatic Detection of Periodic Limb Movements in Sleep (PLMS), And Analysis of Their Relationship to Heart Rate Signals

2021· preprint· en· W4232022570 on OpenAlexaff
Sharadha Kolappan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRestless Legs Syndrome Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolysomnographyComputer sciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationArtificial intelligenceMedicineNeuroscienceElectroencephalographyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Periodic Limb Movement in Sleep (PLMS) are a sleep-related disorder of the limbs that increasingly more research has begun to associate with severe Cardiovascular Diseases (CVD). With that said, Polysomnography (PSG), followed by manual scoring, is the conventional approach being used to monitor the disorder. However, patient inconvenience, and the high costs associated with PSG, has probed the need for alternative screening tools to be developed. Moreover, due to the cumbersome and time-consuming nature of manually scoring for PLMS, more studies have begun to look into automated means of detecting PLMS. Hence, while one of the goals of the current thesis was to use the latest clinical specifications to develop an automated Periodic Limb Movement (PLM) detector, the other goal was to look into alternative signals to monitor PLMS. With that said, in the current thesis, an automated PLM detector was developed and tested on two datasets. In fact, the results were promising in that, correlation coefficients of 0.78 and 0.8, and absolute differences not greater than 9 and 6 (not including the extreme outliers) respectively, were found when comparing the clinical PLM scores with that of the automated algorithm’s PLM scores. Moreover, not only did the automated PLM detector compute PLM scores, it also provided us with PLM segmentation information, i.e., localization of PLM with respect to time. On the other hand, with regards to finding alternative signals to monitor PLMS, the etiology of PLMS was used in order to validate the use of relatively easily acquirable signals, such as Heart Rate (HR) signals, to monitor the condition. Moreover, core features were extracted from the HR signals and the PLM segmentation information from the developed PLM detector was used in order to perform individuaized classification between PLM and non-PLM segments (per subject). Although the results were promising in that, the percent of correctly identifying a given segment as PLM or non-PLM, using the HR features, across most of the subjects, i.e., especially those with PLM Index ≥ 15, were around and well above the 70% range, due to the possibility of other factors interfering with HR during sleep, a more immediate application of the observed PLMS vs HR distinction was, to be able to monitor the autonomic health of an individual, given their PLM information. Specifically, the latter was anticipated to be useful for studies looking into the relationship between PLMS and HR, and thus CVD, or more significantly, those looking into preventing CVD by treating PLM.</p>

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.291 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRestless Legs Syndrome ResearchFrench-language works237,207