MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406087708 · doi:10.2196/63529

Validation of Sleep Measurements of an Actigraphy Watch: Instrument Validation Study

2025· article· en· W4406087708 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mari Waki, Ryohei Nakada, Kayo Waki, Ryo Suzuki, Toshimasa Yamauchi, Masaomi Nangaku, Kazuhiko Ohe

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActigraphySleep (system call)Intraclass correlationPolysomnographyMedicinePhysical therapySleep onsetPhysical medicine and rehabilitationComputer scienceInsomniaPsychometricsCircadian rhythmInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The iAide2 (Tokai) physical activity monitoring system includes diverse measurements and wireless features useful to researchers. The iAide2's sleep measurement capabilities have not been compared to validated sleep measurement standards in any published work. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the iAide2's sleep duration and total sleep time (TST) measurement performance and perform calibration if needed. METHODS: We performed free-living sleep monitoring in 6 convenience-sampled participants without known sleep disorders recruited from within the Waki DTx Laboratory at the Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo. To assess free-living sleep, we validated the iAide2 against a second actigraph that was previously validated against polysomnography, the MotionWatch 8 (MW8; CamNtech Ltd). The participants wore both devices on the nondominant arm, with the MW8 closest to the hand, all day except when bathing. The MW8 and iAide2 assessments both used the MW8 EVENT-marker button to record bedtime and risetime. For the MW8, MotionWare Software (version 1.4.20; CamNtech Ltd) provided TST, and we calculated sleep duration from the sleep onset and sleep offset provided by the software. We used a similar process with the iAide2, using iAide2 software (version 7.0). We analyzed 64 nights and evaluated the agreement between the iAide2 and the MW8 for sleep duration and TST based on intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). RESULTS: The absolute ICCs (2-way mixed effects, absolute agreement, single measurement) for sleep duration (0.69, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.91) and TST (0.56, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.82) were moderate. The consistency ICC (2-way mixed effects, consistency, single measurement) was excellent for sleep duration (0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.95) and moderate for TST (0.78, 95% CI 0.67-0.86). We determined a simple calibration approach. After calibration, the ICCs improved to 0.96 (95% CI 0.94-0.98) for sleep duration and 0.82 (95% CI 0.71-0.88) for TST. The results were not sensitive to the specific participants included, with an ICC range of 0.96-0.97 for sleep duration and 0.79-0.87 for TST when applying our calibration equation to data removing one participant at a time and 0.96-0.97 for sleep duration and 0.79-0.86 for TST when recalibrating while removing one participant at a time. CONCLUSIONS: The measurement errors of the uncalibrated iAide2 for both sleep duration and TST seem too large for them to be useful as absolute measurements, though they could be useful as relative measurements. The measurement errors after calibration are low, and the calibration approach is general and robust, validating the use of iAide2's sleep measurement functions alongside its other features in physical activity research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicSleep and related disorders→French-language works237,207→