Performance evaluation of an under-mattress sleep sensor versus polysomnography in >400 nights with healthy and unhealthy sleep
Manners, J.; Kemps, E.; Lechat, B.; Catcheside, P.; Eckert, D.; Scott, H.
Show abstract
Consumer sleep trackers can provide useful insight into sleep and sleep patterns. However, large scale performance evaluation studies against direct sleep measures are needed to comprehensively understand sleep tracker accuracy. This study evaluated performance of an under-mattress sensor to estimate sleep and wake versus polysomnography, during multiple in-laboratory protocols in a large sample including individuals with and without sleep disorders and during day versus night sleep opportunities. 183 participants (51% male, mean[SD] age=45[18] years) attended the sleep laboratory for a research study that included simultaneous polysomnography and under-mattress sensor (Withings Sleep Analyzer [WSA]) recordings. Epoch-by-epoch analyses with confusion matrices were used to determine accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the WSA versus polysomnography. Bland-Altman plots examined bias in sleep duration, efficiency, onset-latency, and wake after sleep onset. Overall WSA sleep-wake classification accuracy was 83%, sensitivity 95%, and specificity 37%. The WSA significantly overestimated total sleep time (48[81]minutes), Sleep efficiency (9[15]%), sleep onset latency (6[26]), and underestimated wake after sleep onset (54[78]), p<0.05. Accuracy and specificity were higher for night versus daytime sleep opportunities in healthy individuals (89% and 47% versus 82% and 26% respectively, p<0.05). Accuracy and sensitivity were also higher for healthy individuals (89% and 97%) versus those with sleep disorders (81% and 91%, p<0.05). WSA performance is comparable to other consumer sleep trackers, with high sensitivity but poor specificity compared to polysomnography. Poorer accuracy and specificity during daytime versus night-time sleep opportunities is likely due to increased wake time and reduced sleep efficiency. Contactless, under-mattress sleep sensors show promise for accurate sleep monitoring, noting the tendency to over-estimate sleep particularly where wake time is high.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Home-EEG assessment of possible compensatory mechanisms for sleep disruption in highly irregular shift workers - The ANCHOR study 97%
- A single nucleotide polymorphism in the HOMER1 gene is associated with sleep latency and theta power in sleep electroencephalogram 95%
- Quantitative detection of sleep apnea with wearable watch device 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of Dreem headband for sleep staging and EEG spectral analysis in people living with Alzheimer’s and older adults 98%
- Performance of an Electroencephalography-Measuring Headband or Actigraphy Compared with Polysomnography in Older Adults with Sleep Disturbances 97%
- Changes of evening exposure to electronic devices during the COVID-19 lockdown affect the time course of sleep disturbances 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Methodological approach to sleep state misperception in insomnia disorder: comparison between multiple nights of actigraphy recordings and a single night of polysomnography recording 96%
- Application of Down-Phase Targeted Auditory Stimulation During Sleep in a Home Setting: A Feasibility Study Across Seven Consecutive Nights 96%
- Effects of one-night partial sleep deprivation on perivascular space volume fraction: Findings from the Stockholm Sleepy Brain Study 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- The relationship between subjective sleep quality and cognitive performance in healthy young adults: Evidence from three empirical studies 95%
- Is sleep apnea-hypopnea index relevant for impaired brain perfusion and desaturation in patients with severe obstructive sleep apnea syndromes? 95%
- Topographical relocation of adolescent sleep spindles reveals a new maturational pattern of the human brain 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.