↓ Skip to main content

Comparisons of Portable Sleep Monitors of Different Modalities: Potential as Naturalistic Sleep Recorders

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparisons of Portable Sleep Monitors of Different Modalities: Potential as Naturalistic Sleep Recorders
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, July 2016
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2016.00110
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masahiro Matsuo, Fumi Masuda, Yukiyoshi Sumi, Masahiro Takahashi, Naoto Yamada, Masako Hasegawa Ohira, Koichi Fujiwara, Takashi Kanemura, Hiroshi Kadotani

Abstract

Humans spend more than one-fourth of their life sleeping, and sleep quality has been significantly linked to health. However, the objective examination of ambulatory sleep quality remains a challenge, since sleep is a state of unconsciousness, which limits the reliability of self-reports. Therefore, a non-invasive, continuous, and objective method for the recording and analysis of naturalistic sleep is required. Portable sleep recording devices provide a suitable solution for the ambulatory analysis of sleep quality. In this study, the performance of two activity-based sleep monitors (Actiwatch and MTN-210) and a single-channel electroencephalography (EEG)-based sleep monitor (SleepScope) were compared in order to examine their reliability for the assessment of sleep quality. Twenty healthy adults were recruited for this study. First, data from daily activity recorded by Actiwatch and MTN-210 were compared to determine whether MTN-210, a more affordable device, could yield data similar to Actiwatch, the de facto standard. In addition, sleep detection ability was examined using data obtained by polysomnography as reference. One simple analysis included comparing the sleep/wake detection ability of Actiwatch, MTN-210, and SleepScope. Furthermore, the fidelity of sleep stage determination was examined using SleepScope in finer time resolution. The results indicate that MTN-210 demonstrates an activity pattern comparable to that of Actiwatch, although their sensitivity preferences were not identical. Moreover, MTN-210 provides assessment of sleep duration comparable to that of the wrist-worn Actiwatch when MTN-210 was attached to the body. SleepScope featured superior overall sleep detection performance among the three methods tested. Furthermore, SleepScope was able to provide information regarding sleep architecture, although systemic bias was found. The present results suggest that single-channel EEG-based sleep monitors are the superior option for the examination of naturalistic sleep. The current results pave a possible future use for reliable portable sleep assessment methods in an ambulatory rather than a laboratory setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 1 1%
Unknown 66 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Other 6 9%
Student > Master 5 7%
Other 15 22%
Unknown 19 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 25%
Neuroscience 7 10%
Engineering 6 9%
Psychology 5 7%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 21 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 15 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,335,770
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#8,813
of 11,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,050
of 355,956 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#50
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,802 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 355,956 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.