Cited by 216Sleep and related disordersEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesSleep and Work-Related Fatigue

Validation of an automated wireless system to monitor sleep in healthy adults

Open access
SHAMBROOM, JOHN R., FÁBREGAS, STEPHAN E., JOHNSTONE, JACK·2012·Journal of Sleep Research

Abstract

The availability of a reliable system to record sleep stage measures easily and automatically in ambulatory settings could be of utility for research and clinical work. The aim of this study was to evaluate a novel wireless system (WS) that does not require skilled preparation for the automatic collection and scoring of human sleep. Twenty-nine healthy adults underwent concurrent sleep measurement via the WS, polysomnography (PSG) and an actigraph (ACT) in a sleep laboratory for one assessment night preceded by an acclimation night. The PSG recordings were scored by two experienced trained technicians from separate laboratories. Each recording was scored by both technicians to Rechtschaffen and Kales (R&K) criteria. The WS and ACT were compared with each of the PSG scores and a consensus PSG score, and the PSG scores were compared with each other. Inter-rater agreement was assessed for each pair over all pooled epochs by percentage agreement, Cohen's kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient. The WS agreement with each of the two PSG scores for sleep stages was 75.8 and 74.7%, respectively. WS agreement with each of the two PSG scores for sleep/wakefulness was 92.6 and 91.1%, ACT agreement with PSG was 86.3 and 85.7%. The PSG scorers' agreement with each other for sleep stages was 83.2%, and for sleep/wakefulness was 95.8%. The findings from the current study indicate that the WS may provide an easy to use and accurate complement to other established technologies for measuring sleep in healthy adults.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2869.2011.00944.x

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
SHAMBROOM, J. R., FÁBREGAS, S. E., & JOHNSTONE, J.
Corresponding author
SHAMBROOM, JOHN R.
Venue
Journal of Sleep Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2011-08-22
Volume
21
Issue
2
Pages
221-230
ISSN
  • 0962-1105 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2869
OpenAlex
W2158289843
Cited by
216
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 15
FWCI
23.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Sleep Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Keywords
automated sleep scoring, sleep stage classification, polysomnography, actigraphy, interobserver agreement, healthy adults
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Sleep, Sleep Stages, Wakefulness, Reproducibility of Results, Polysomnography, Young Adult, Actigraphy, Wireless Technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review