A survey on sleep assessment methods

Author:

Ibáñez Vanessa1,Silva Josep2,Cauli Omar3

Affiliation:

1. Facultad de Enfermería, Universidad Católica de Valencia “San Vicente Mártir”, Valencia, Spain

2. Departamento de Sistemas Informáticos y Computación, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain

3. Departamento de Enfermería; Universidad de Valencia, Valencia, Spain

Abstract

Purpose A literature review is presented that aims to summarize and compare current methods to evaluate sleep. Methods Current sleep assessment methods have been classified according to different criteria; e.g., objective (polysomnography, actigraphy…) vs. subjective (sleep questionnaires, diaries…), contact vs. contactless devices, and need for medical assistance vs. self-assessment. A comparison of validation studies is carried out for each method, identifying their sensitivity and specificity reported in the literature. Finally, the state of the market has also been reviewed with respect to customers’ opinions about current sleep apps. Results A taxonomy that classifies the sleep detection methods. A description of each method that includes the tendencies of their underlying technologies analyzed in accordance with the literature. A comparison in terms of precision of existing validation studies and reports. Discussion In order of accuracy, sleep detection methods may be arranged as follows: Questionnaire < Sleep diary < Contactless devices < Contact devices < Polysomnography A literature review suggests that current subjective methods present a sensitivity between 73% and 97.7%, while their specificity ranges in the interval 50%–96%. Objective methods such as actigraphy present a sensibility higher than 90%. However, their specificity is low compared to their sensitivity, being one of the limitations of such technology. Moreover, there are other factors, such as the patient’s perception of her or his sleep, that can be provided only by subjective methods. Therefore, sleep detection methods should be combined to produce a synergy between objective and subjective methods. The review of the market indicates the most valued sleep apps, but it also identifies problems and gaps, e.g., many hardware devices have not been validated and (especially software apps) should be studied before their clinical use.

Publisher

PeerJ

Subject

General Agricultural and Biological Sciences,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Medicine,General Neuroscience

Reference76 articles.

1. Sleep devices;American Sleep Association (ASA),2017

2. Polysomnography;Armon,2016

3. A validation of wrist actigraphy against polysomnography in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder;Baandrup;Journal of Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment,2015

4. The maintenance of wakefulness test in normal healthy subjects;Banks;Sleep,2004

5. Is there a clinical role for smartphone seep apps? Comparison of sleep cycle detection by a smartphone application to polysomnography;Bhat;Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine,2015

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3