↓ Skip to main content

Expert and crowd-sourced validation of an individualized sleep spindle detection method employing complex demodulation and individualized normalization

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
Expert and crowd-sourced validation of an individualized sleep spindle detection method employing complex demodulation and individualized normalization
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00507
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura B. Ray, Stéphane Sockeel, Melissa Soon, Arnaud Bore, Ayako Myhr, Bobby Stojanoski, Rhodri Cusack, Adrian M. Owen, Julien Doyon, Stuart M. Fogel

Abstract

A spindle detection method was developed that: (1) extracts the signal of interest (i.e., spindle-related phasic changes in sigma) relative to ongoing "background" sigma activity using complex demodulation, (2) accounts for variations of spindle characteristics across the night, scalp derivations and between individuals, and (3) employs a minimum number of sometimes arbitrary, user-defined parameters. Complex demodulation was used to extract instantaneous power in the spindle band. To account for intra- and inter-individual differences, the signal was z-score transformed using a 60 s sliding window, per channel, over the course of the recording. Spindle events were detected with a z-score threshold corresponding to a low probability (e.g., 99th percentile). Spindle characteristics, such as amplitude, duration and oscillatory frequency, were derived for each individual spindle following detection, which permits spindles to be subsequently and flexibly categorized as slow or fast spindles from a single detection pass. Spindles were automatically detected in 15 young healthy subjects. Two experts manually identified spindles from C3 during Stage 2 sleep, from each recording; one employing conventional guidelines, and the other, identifying spindles with the aid of a sigma (11-16 Hz) filtered channel. These spindles were then compared between raters and to the automated detection to identify the presence of true positives, true negatives, false positives and false negatives. This method of automated spindle detection resolves or avoids many of the limitations that complicate automated spindle detection, and performs well compared to a group of non-experts, and importantly, has good external validity with respect to the extant literature in terms of the characteristics of automatically detected spindles.

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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 66 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 15 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 9 13%
Psychology 9 13%
Engineering 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 23 34%
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 24 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,292,660
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,541
of 7,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,515
of 274,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#131
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 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 7,152 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. 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 274,665 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 154 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.