Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Comparison of a single-channel EEG sleep study to polysomnography
Lucey BP, Mcleland JS, Toedebusch CD, Boyd J, Morris JC, Landsness EC, Yamada K, Holtzman DM.. Journal of sleep research, 2016-06-02
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
An accurate home sleep study to assess electroencephalography (EEG)-based sleep stages and EEG power would be advantageous for both clinical and research purposes, such as for longitudinal studies measuring changes in sleep stages over time. The purpose of this study was to compare sleep scoring of a single-channel EEG recorded simultaneously on the forehead against attended polysomnography. Participants were recruited from both a clinical sleep centre and a longitudinal research study investigating cognitively normal ageing and Alzheimer's disease. Analysis for overall epoch-by-epoch agreement found strong and substantial agreement between the single-channel EEG compared to polysomnography (κ = 0.67). Slow wave activity in the frontal regions was also similar when comparing the single-channel EEG device to polysomnography. As expected, Stage N1 showed poor agreement (sensitivity 0.2) due to lack of occipital electrodes. Other sleep parameters, such as sleep latency and rapid eye movement (REM) onset latency, had decreased agreement. Participants with disrupted sleep consolidation, such as from obstructive sleep apnea, also had poor agreement. We suspect that disagreement in sleep parameters between the single-channel EEG and polysomnography is due partially to altered waveform morphology and/or poorer signal quality in the single-channel derivation. Our results show that single-channel EEG provides comparable results to polysomnography in assessing REM, combined Stages N2 and N3 sleep and several other parameters, including frontal slow wave activity. The data establish that single-channel EEG can be a useful research tool.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Lucey, B. P., Mcleland, J. S., Toedebusch, C. D., Boyd, J., Morris, J. C., Landsness, E. C., et al. (2016). Comparison of a single-channel EEG sleep study to polysomnography. Journal of sleep research. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsr.12417
Vancouver
Lucey BP, Mcleland JS, Toedebusch CD, Boyd J, Morris JC, Landsness EC, et al. Comparison of a single-channel EEG sleep study to polysomnography. Journal of sleep research. 2016. doi:10.1111/jsr.12417. PMID: 27252090.
BibTeX
@article{lucey2016-27252090,
author = {Lucey, B. P. and Mcleland, J. S. and Toedebusch, C. D. and Boyd, J. and Morris, J. C. and Landsness, E. C. and Yamada, K. and Holtzman, D. M.},
title = {{Comparison of a single-channel EEG sleep study to polysomnography}},
journal = {Journal of sleep research},
year = {2016},
doi = {10.1111/jsr.12417},
pmid = {27252090},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/jsr.12417}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 8 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Analysis for overall epoch-by-epoch agreement found strong and substantial agreement between the single-channel EEG compared to polysomnography (κ = 0.67).
- Our results show that single-channel EEG provides comparable results to polysomnography in assessing REM, combined Stages N2 and N3 sleep and several other parameters, including frontal slow wave activity.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 57/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 57 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of sleep research) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2016 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (pubmed indexes it as a clinical or observational study) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 27252090) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 33 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 33 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 57 out of 100. |
| Total | 57 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related studies in Brain scans and imaging
Also tagged “eeg”
4 studies in the library carry the topic tag “eeg”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 4 tagged studies.