Feasibility and Acceptability of Using Wireless Limited Polysomnography to Capture Sleep Before, During, and After Hospitalization for Patients With Planned Cardiothoracic Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sleep disruption, a common symptom among patients requiring cardiovascular surgery, is a potential risk factor for the development of postoperative delirium. Postoperative delirium is a disorder of acute disturbances in cognition associated with prolonged hospitalization, cognitive decline, and mortality. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of using polysomnography (PSG) to capture sleep in patients with scheduled cardiothoracic surgery. METHODS: Wireless limited PSG assessed sleep at baseline (presurgery at home), postoperatively in the intensive care unit, and at home post hospital discharge. Primary outcomes were quality and completeness of PSG signals, and acceptability by participants and nursing staff. RESULTS: Among 15 patients, PSG data were of high quality, and mean percentage of unscorable data was 5.5% ± 11.1%, 3.7% ± 5.4%, and 3.7% ± 8.4% for baseline, intensive care unit, and posthospitalization measurements, respectively. Nurses and patients found the PSG monitor acceptable. CONCLUSIONS: Wireless, limited PSG to capture sleep across the surgical continuum was feasible, and data were of high quality. Authors of future studies will evaluate associations of sleep indices and development of postoperative delirium in this high-risk population.
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 | 0.006 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".