Karine Lacourse1, Jacques Delfrate1, Julien Beaudry1, Paul Peppard2, Simon C Warby3. 1. Center for Advanced Research in Sleep Medicine, Centre de Recherche de l'Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada. 2. Population Health Sciences, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, United States. 3. Center for Advanced Research in Sleep Medicine, Centre de Recherche de l'Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada; Département de Psychiatrie, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada. Electronic address: simon.c.warby@umontreal.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sleep spindles are a marker of stage 2 NREM sleep that are linked to learning & memory and are altered by many neurological diseases. Although visual inspection of the EEG is considered the gold standard for spindle detection, it is time-consuming, costly and can introduce inter/ra-scorer bias. NEW METHOD: Our goal was to develop a simple and efficient sleep-spindle detector (algorithm #7, or 'A7') that emulates human scoring. 'A7' runs on a single EEG channel and relies on four parameters: the absolute sigma power, relative sigma power, and correlation/covariance of the sigma band-passed signal to the original EEG signal. To test the performance of the detector, we compared it against a gold standard spindle dataset derived from the consensus of a group of human experts. RESULTS: The by-event performance of the 'A7' spindle detector was 74% precision, 68% recall (sensitivity), and an F1-score of 0.70. This performance was equivalent to an individual human expert (average F1-score = 0.67). COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD(S): The F1-score of 'A7' was 0.17 points higher than other spindle detectors tested. Existing detectors have a tendency to find large numbers of false positives compared to human scorers. On a by-subject basis, the spindle density estimates produced by A7 were well correlated with human experts (r2 = 0.82) compared to the existing detectors (average r2 = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: The 'A7' detector is a sensitive and precise tool designed to emulate human spindle scoring by minimizing the number of 'hidden spindles' detected. We provide an open-source implementation of this detector for further use and testing.
BACKGROUND: Sleep spindles are a marker of stage 2 NREM sleep that are linked to learning & memory and are altered by many neurological diseases. Although visual inspection of the EEG is considered the gold standard for spindle detection, it is time-consuming, costly and can introduce inter/ra-scorer bias. NEW METHOD: Our goal was to develop a simple and efficient sleep-spindle detector (algorithm #7, or 'A7') that emulates human scoring. 'A7' runs on a single EEG channel and relies on four parameters: the absolute sigma power, relative sigma power, and correlation/covariance of the sigma band-passed signal to the original EEG signal. To test the performance of the detector, we compared it against a gold standard spindle dataset derived from the consensus of a group of human experts. RESULTS: The by-event performance of the 'A7' spindle detector was 74% precision, 68% recall (sensitivity), and an F1-score of 0.70. This performance was equivalent to an individual human expert (average F1-score = 0.67). COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD(S): The F1-score of 'A7' was 0.17 points higher than other spindle detectors tested. Existing detectors have a tendency to find large numbers of false positives compared to human scorers. On a by-subject basis, the spindle density estimates produced by A7 were well correlated with human experts (r2 = 0.82) compared to the existing detectors (average r2 = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: The 'A7' detector is a sensitive and precise tool designed to emulate human spindle scoring by minimizing the number of 'hidden spindles' detected. We provide an open-source implementation of this detector for further use and testing.
Authors: Pekka Tani; Nina Lindberg; Taina Nieminen-von Wendt; Lennart von Wendt; Jussi Virkkala; Björn Appelberg; Tarja Porkka-Heiskanen Journal: Neuropsychobiology Date: 2004 Impact factor: 2.328
Authors: Fabio Ferrarelli; Reto Huber; Michael J Peterson; Marcello Massimini; Michael Murphy; Brady A Riedner; Adam Watson; Pietro Bria; Giulio Tononi Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Eero Huupponen; Germán Gómez-Herrero; Antti Saastamoinen; Alpo Värri; Joel Hasan; Sari-Leena Himanen Journal: Artif Intell Med Date: 2007-06-06 Impact factor: 5.326
Authors: Heidi Danker-Hopfe; D Kunz; G Gruber; G Klösch; J L Lorenzo; S L Himanen; B Kemp; T Penzel; J Röschke; H Dorn; A Schlögl; E Trenker; G Dorffner Journal: J Sleep Res Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 3.981
Authors: Ryan E Gill; Bohao Tang; Lindsay Smegal; Jack H Adamek; Danielle McAuliffe; Balaji M Lakshmanan; Siddharth Srivastava; Angela M Quain; Alison J Sebold; Doris D M Lin; Eric H Kossoff; Brian Caffo; Anne M Comi; Joshua B Ewen Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2021-08-05 Impact factor: 4.861
Authors: Serene Y Wang; Kirsten C Baker; Jessica L Culbreth; Olivia Tracy; Madison Arora; Tingtong Liu; Sydney Morris; Megan B Collins; Erin J Wamsley Journal: Learn Mem Date: 2021-05-19 Impact factor: 2.699
Authors: Yuval Levin; Nishitha S Hosamane; Taylor E McNair; Shrujana S Kunnam; Benjamin D Philpot; Zheng Fan; Michael S Sidorov Journal: Autism Res Date: 2022-03-19 Impact factor: 4.633