Performance Evaluation of a New Sport Watch in Sleep Tracking: A Comparison against Overnight Polysomnography in Young Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: This study aimed to validate the ability of a prototype sport watch (Polar Electro Oy, FI) to recognize wake and sleep states in two trials with and without an interval training session (IT) 6 h prior to bedtime. Methods: Thirty-six participants completed this study. Participants performed a maximal aerobic test and three polysomnography (PSG) assessments. The first night served as a device familiarization night and to screen for sleep apnea. The second and third in-home PSG assessments were counterbalanced with/without IT. Accuracy and agreement in detecting sleep stages were calculated between PSG and the prototype. Results: Accuracy for the different sleep stages (REM, N1 and N2, N3, and awake) as a true positive for the nights without exercise was 84 ± 5%, 64 ± 6%, 81 ± 6%, and 91 ± 6%, respectively, and for the nights with exercise was 83 ± 7%, 63 ± 8%, 80 ± 7%, and 92 ± 6%, respectively. The agreement for the sleep night without exercise was 60.1 ± 8.1%, k = 0.39 ± 0.1, and with exercise was 59.2 ± 9.8%, k = 0.36 ± 0.1. No significant differences were observed between nights or between the sexes. Conclusion: The prototype showed better or similar accuracy and agreement to wrist-worn consumer products on the market for the detection of sleep stages with healthy adults. However, further investigations will need to be conducted with other populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".