Back

The Sleep-Wake Classification Performance of Pediatric-Trained Machine Learning Algorithms for Raw Accelerometer Data

Chen, P.-W.; Cielo, C.; Walsh, O.; Mcdonald, M.; Song, P. X.; Goldstein, C.; Moreno, J. P.; Jansen, E.; Mitchell, J. A.

2026-06-01 pediatrics
10.64898/2026.05.28.26354364 medRxiv
Show abstract

Introduction: Actigraphy sleep-wake classification methods increasingly seek to leverage raw acceleration data and machine-learning-based classification, but performance evaluation in pediatrics is limited. We trained machine-learning models using pediatric data and compared their sleep-wake classification performance with existing algorithms for children. Methods: Sixty-five children (46% female, ages 5.3 to 17.7 years) completed in-lab overnight polysomnography and wore a GENEActiv device on their non-dominant wrist. The acceleration data were converted into 30-second epochs and aligned with physician-scored sleep-wake data from electroencephalography. Seven machine-learning models were trained using leave-one-subject-out cross-validation. Epoch-by-epoch analyses generated performance metrics (e.g., balanced accuracy [BA]) and discrepancy analyses provided overall sleep duration bias estimates. The combination of highest performance and least bias was used to rank using Euclidean distance scores - where a lower score represents closer to perfect performance and zero bias. For benchmarking, we included GGIR sleep scoring algorithms and an adult trained random forest classifier. Results: Overall, 560.1 hours of polysomnography and actigraphy data were collected (74.4% of epochs were scored as sleep). The pediatric-trained local-global long-short term memory (LSTM) classifier had the most optimal epoch-by-epoch performance (e.g., BA=0.85, sensitivity=0.88, specificity=0.83, ROC-AUC=0.95, and Cohen kappa=0.67). These metrics exceeded that of an adult-trained random forest classifier and GGIR-based algorithms. Discrepancy analyses revealed that overall sleep duration was underestimated by an average of 25 minutes using the LSTM classifier with no proportional bias. Conclusion: We trained seven pediatric sleep-wake classifiers that had strong ability to detect sleep and wake, with the LSTM classifier being most optimal.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"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.