Cargando…
A survey on sleep assessment methods
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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
PeerJ Inc.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5971842/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29844990 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4849 |
_version_ | 1783326343135494144 |
---|---|
author | Ibáñez, Vanessa Silva, Josep Cauli, Omar |
author_facet | Ibáñez, Vanessa Silva, Josep Cauli, Omar |
author_sort | Ibáñez, Vanessa |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5971842 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | PeerJ Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-59718422018-05-29 A survey on sleep assessment methods Ibáñez, Vanessa Silva, Josep Cauli, Omar PeerJ Global Health 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. PeerJ Inc. 2018-05-25 /pmc/articles/PMC5971842/ /pubmed/29844990 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4849 Text en ©2018 Ibáñez et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited. |
spellingShingle | Global Health Ibáñez, Vanessa Silva, Josep Cauli, Omar A survey on sleep assessment methods |
title | A survey on sleep assessment methods |
title_full | A survey on sleep assessment methods |
title_fullStr | A survey on sleep assessment methods |
title_full_unstemmed | A survey on sleep assessment methods |
title_short | A survey on sleep assessment methods |
title_sort | survey on sleep assessment methods |
topic | Global Health |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5971842/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29844990 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4849 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ibanezvanessa asurveyonsleepassessmentmethods AT silvajosep asurveyonsleepassessmentmethods AT cauliomar asurveyonsleepassessmentmethods AT ibanezvanessa surveyonsleepassessmentmethods AT silvajosep surveyonsleepassessmentmethods AT cauliomar surveyonsleepassessmentmethods |