0329 Wake Intrusions in the EEG: A Novel Application of the Odds Ratio Product in Identifying Subthreshold Arousals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Arousal scoring is controversial, due to its lack of objectivity and dependency on other intrinsic characteristics of sleep. Conventional arousal measurements have not consistently predicted insomnia severity. The present study used a novel application of the Odds Ratio Product (ORP), a measure of sleep depth ranging from 0 (deep sleep) to 2.5 (fully awake), to identify subtle wake intrusions in sleep (i.e., subthreshold arousals). We assessed whether these intrusions are better predictors of frequent insomnia symptoms when compared to conventional arousal measurements. Methods Using cross-sectional data from the Sleep Heart Health Study with high-quality ORP data (SHHS1; n = 5,771), accessed through the National Sleep Research Resource, we defined ‘wake intrusions’ as the number of times the ORP spiked above a wake threshold of 2.0 (99% agreement in wake scoring among sleep scorers) during sleep. The wake intrusion index (WII) was derived by calculating the quotient of the number of intrusions by total sleep time. Insomnia was defined from self-reported frequency of >15x/month of insomnia symptoms: delayed sleep onset, difficulty maintaining sleep, and/or early morning awakenings (n = 617). Linear models were used to examine the associations between insomnia and WII, as well as arousal index. Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and apnea-hypopnea index (AHI). Results There was a weak, but significant correlation between conventional arousal index and WII (r=0.25, 95%CI [0.22, 0.27], p< 0.001). After adjusting for age, sex, BMI and AHI, frequent insomnia symptoms were associated with WII (β=9.47, 95%CI [2.07, 16.87], p=0.012), but not with arousal index (β=0.16, 95%CI [-0.59,0.91], p=0.217). Conclusion Results suggest that the ORP WII may be more sensitive than the arousal index. Moreover, frequent insomnia symptoms were independently associated with WII in adjusted analysis, while not with the arousal index. The role of the ORP WII as a potential physiological marker of insomnia deserves further investigation. Support (if any) NIH (U01HL53916, U01HL53931, U01HL53934, U01HL53937, U01HL64360, U01HL53938, U01HL53940, U01HL53941, U01HL63463, R24HL114473, 75N92019R002).
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".