Manual scoring of polysomnograms is a time-consuming and tedious process. To expedite the scoring of polysomnograms, several computerized algorithms for automated scoring have been developed. The overarching goal of this study is to determine the validity of the Somnolyzer system, an automated system for scoring polysomnograms.
The analysis sample comprised 97 sleep studies. Each polysomnogram was manually scored by certified technologists from four sleep laboratories and concurrently subjected to automated scoring by the Somnolyzer system. Agreement between manual and automated scoring was examined. Sleep staging and scoring of disordered breathing events was conducted using the 2007 American Academy of Sleep Medicine criteria.
Clinical sleep laboratories.
A high degree of agreement was noted between manual and automated scoring of the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI). The average correlation between the manually scored AHI across the four clinical sites was 0.92 (95% confidence interval: 0.90-0.93). Similarly, the average correlation between the manual and Somnolyzer-scored AHI values was 0.93 (95% confidence interval: 0.91-0.96). Thus, interscorer correlation between the manually scored results was no different than that derived from manual and automated scoring. Substantial concordance in arousal index, total sleep time, and sleep efficiency between manual and automated scoring was also observed. In contrast, differences were noted between manually and automated scored percentages of sleep stages N1, N2, and N3.
Automated analysis of polysomnograms using the Somnolyzer system provides results that are comparable to manual scoring for commonly used metrics in sleep medicine. Although differences exist between manual versus automated scoring for specific sleep stages, the level of agreement between manual and automated scoring is not significantly different than that between any two human scorers. In light of the burden associated with manual scoring, automated scoring platforms provide a viable complement of tools in the diagnostic armamentarium of sleep medicine.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 November 2024.
All research outputs
#6,148,596
of 31,660,612 outputs
Outputs from Sleep
#2,376
of 5,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,120
of 301,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sleep
#23
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,660,612 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,489 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 301,126 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
