Comparison analysis between standard polysomnographic data and in-ear-EEG signals: A preliminary study
Sleep Advances, 2025 Study Objectives: Polysomnography (PSG) currently serves as the benchmark for evaluating sleep disorders. Its discomfort makes long-term monitoring unfeasible, leading to bias in sleep quality assessment. Hence, less invasive, cost-effective, and portable alternatives need to be...
Saved in:
Main Authors | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
18.01.2024
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
DOI | 10.48550/arxiv.2401.10107 |
Cover
Summary: | Sleep Advances, 2025 Study Objectives: Polysomnography (PSG) currently serves as the benchmark for
evaluating sleep disorders. Its discomfort makes long-term monitoring
unfeasible, leading to bias in sleep quality assessment. Hence, less invasive,
cost-effective, and portable alternatives need to be explored. One promising
contender is the in-ear-EEG sensor. This study aims to establish a methodology
to assess the similarity between the single-channel in-ear-EEG and standard PSG
derivations.
Methods: The study involves four-hour signals recorded from ten healthy
subjects aged 18 to 60 years. Recordings are analyzed following two
complementary approaches: (i) a hypnogram-based analysis aimed at assessing the
agreement between PSG and in-ear-EEG-derived hypnograms; and (ii) a
feature-based analysis based on time- and frequency- domain feature extraction,
unsupervised feature selection, and definition of Feature-based Similarity
Index via Jensen-Shannon Divergence (JSD-FSI).
Results: We find large variability between PSG and in-ear-EEG hypnograms
scored by the same sleep expert according to Cohen's kappa metric, with
significantly greater agreements for PSG scorers than for in-ear-EEG scorers (p
< 0.001) based on Fleiss' kappa metric. On average, we demonstrate a high
similarity between PSG and in-ear-EEG signals in terms of JSD-FSI (0.79 +/-
0.06 -awake, 0.77 +/- 0.07 -NREM, and 0.67 +/- 0.10 -REM) and in line with the
similarity values computed independently on standard PSG-channel-combinations.
Conclusions: In-ear-EEG is a valuable solution for home-based sleep
monitoring, however further studies with a larger and more heterogeneous
dataset are needed. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.48550/arxiv.2401.10107 |