Literature DB >> 33792456

Performance of Fitbit Charge 3 against polysomnography in measuring sleep in adolescent boys and girls.

Luca Menghini1,2, Dilara Yuksel1, Aimee Goldstone1, Fiona C Baker1,3, Massimiliano de Zambotti1.   

Abstract

We evaluated the performance of Fitbit Charge 3™ (FC3), a multi-sensor commercial sleep-tracker, for measuring sleep in adolescents against gold-standard laboratory polysomnography (PSG). Single-night PSG and FC3 sleep outcomes were compared in thirty-nine adolescents (22 girls; 16-19 years), 12 of whom presented with clinical/subclinical DSM-5 insomnia symptoms (7 girls). Discrepancy analysis, Bland-Altman plots, and epoch-by-epoch analyses were used to evaluate FC3 performance. The influence of several factors potentially affecting FC3 performance (e.g., sex, age, body mass index, firmware version, and magnitude of heart rate changes between consecutive PSG epochs) was also tested. In the sample of healthy adolescents, FC3 systematically underestimated PSG total sleep time by about 11 min and sleep efficiency by 2.5%, and overestimated wake after sleep onset by 9 min. Proportional biases were detected for "light" and "deep" sleep duration, resulting in significant underestimation of these parameters for those participants having longer PSG N1+ N2 and N3 durations, respectively. No significant systematic bias was detected for sleep efficiency and sleep onset latency. Epoch-by-epoch analysis showed sleep-stage sensitivity (average proportion of PSG epochs correctly classified by the device for a given sleep stage) of 68% for wake, 78% for "light" sleep, 59% for "deep" sleep, and 69% for rapid eye movement (REM) sleep in healthy sleepers. Similar results were found in the sample of adolescents with insomnia symptoms. Body mass index was positively associated with FC3-PSG discrepancies in wake after sleep onset (R2 = .16, p = .048). The magnitude of the heart rate acceleration/deceleration between consecutive PSG epochs was an important factor affecting FC3 classifications of sleep stages. Our results are in line with a general trend in the literature, suggesting better performance for the recently introduced multi-sensor devices compared to motion-only devices, although further developments are needed to improve accuracy in sleep stage classification and wake detection. Further insight is needed to determine factors potentially affecting device performance, such as accuracy and reliability (consistency of performance over time), in different samples and conditions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fitbit; Wearable sleep trackers; accuracy; adolescence; consumer sleep technology; insomnia

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33792456      PMCID: PMC8255273          DOI: 10.1080/07420528.2021.1903481

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chronobiol Int        ISSN: 0742-0528            Impact factor:   3.749


  38 in total

Review 1.  Measuring agreement in method comparison studies.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  AIC model selection using Akaike weights.

Authors:  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers; Simon Farrell
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-02

Review 3.  Changes in sleep as a function of adolescent development.

Authors:  Ian M Colrain; Fiona C Baker
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 7.444

Review 4.  Sensors Capabilities, Performance, and Use of Consumer Sleep Technology.

Authors:  Massimiliano de Zambotti; Nicola Cellini; Luca Menghini; Michela Sarlo; Fiona C Baker
Journal:  Sleep Med Clin       Date:  2020-01-03

5.  Estimation of sleep stages in a healthy adult population from optical plethysmography and accelerometer signals.

Authors:  Z Beattie; Y Oyang; A Statan; A Ghoreyshi; A Pantelopoulos; A Russell; C Heneghan
Journal:  Physiol Meas       Date:  2017-10-31       Impact factor: 2.833

6.  Consumer Sleep Technology: An American Academy of Sleep Medicine Position Statement.

Authors:  Seema Khosla; Maryann C Deak; Dominic Gault; Cathy A Goldstein; Dennis Hwang; Younghoon Kwon; Daniel O'Hearn; Sharon Schutte-Rodin; Michael Yurcheshen; Ilene M Rosen; Douglas B Kirsch; Ronald D Chervin; Kelly A Carden; Kannan Ramar; R Nisha Aurora; David A Kristo; Raman K Malhotra; Jennifer L Martin; Eric J Olson; Carol L Rosen; James A Rowley
Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med       Date:  2018-05-15       Impact factor: 4.062

7.  The Sleep of the Ring: Comparison of the ŌURA Sleep Tracker Against Polysomnography.

Authors:  Massimiliano de Zambotti; Leonardo Rosas; Ian M Colrain; Fiona C Baker
Journal:  Behav Sleep Med       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 2.964

8.  The Validity of a New Consumer-Targeted Wrist Device in Sleep Measurement: An Overnight Comparison Against Polysomnography in Children and Adolescents.

Authors:  Anu-Katriina Pesonen; Liisa Kuula
Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med       Date:  2018-04-15       Impact factor: 4.062

9.  Sex- and Age-Dependent Differences in Autonomic Nervous System Functioning in Adolescents.

Authors:  Massimiliano de Zambotti; Harold Javitz; Peter L Franzen; Ty Brumback; Duncan B Clark; Ian M Colrain; Fiona C Baker
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2017-12-02       Impact factor: 5.012

10.  Accuracy in Wrist-Worn, Sensor-Based Measurements of Heart Rate and Energy Expenditure in a Diverse Cohort.

Authors:  Anna Shcherbina; C Mikael Mattsson; Daryl Waggott; Heidi Salisbury; Jeffrey W Christle; Trevor Hastie; Matthew T Wheeler; Euan A Ashley
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2017-05-24
View more
  3 in total

1.  Performance of Four Commercial Wearable Sleep-Tracking Devices Tested Under Unrestricted Conditions at Home in Healthy Young Adults.

Authors:  Evan D Chinoy; Joseph A Cuellar; Jason T Jameson; Rachel R Markwald
Journal:  Nat Sci Sleep       Date:  2022-03-22

2.  What possibly affects nighttime heart rate? Conclusions from N-of-1 observational data.

Authors:  Igor Matias; Eric J Daza; Katarzyna Wac
Journal:  Digit Health       Date:  2022-08-24

3.  Validation of Fitbit Charge 4 for assessing sleep in Chinese patients with chronic insomnia: A comparison against polysomnography and actigraphy.

Authors:  Xiaofang Dong; Sen Yang; Yuanli Guo; Peihua Lv; Min Wang; Yusheng Li
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-10-18       Impact factor: 3.752

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.