{"title":"Validity of Consumer Activity Wristbands and Wearable EEG for Measuring Overall Sleep Parameters and Sleep Structure in Free-Living Conditions.","authors":"Zilu Liang, Mario Alberto Chapa Martell","doi":"10.1007/s41666-018-0013-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Consumer sleep tracking technologies offer an unobtrusive and cost-efficient way to monitor sleep in free-living conditions. Technological advances in hardware and software have significantly improved the functionality of the new gadgets that recently appeared in the market. However, whether the latest gadgets can provide valid measurements on overall sleep parameters and sleep structure such as deep and REM sleep has not been examined. In this study, we aimed to investigate the validity of the latest consumer sleep tracking devices including an activity wristband Fitbit Charge 2 and a wearable EEG-based eye mask Neuroon in comparison to a medical sleep monitor. First, we confirmed that Fitbit Charge 2 can automatically detect the onset and offset of sleep with reasonable accuracy. Second, analysis found that both consumer devices produced comparable results in measuring total sleep duration and sleep efficiency compared to the medical device. In addition, Fitbit accurately measured the number of awakenings, while Neuroon with good signal quality had satisfactory performance on total awake time and sleep onset latency. However, measuring sleep structure including light, deep, and REM sleep remains to be challenging for both consumer devices. Third, greater discrepancies were observed between Neuroon and the medical device in nights with more disrupted sleep and when the signal quality was poor, but no trend was observed in Fitbit Charge 2. This study suggests that current consumer sleep tracking technologies may be immature for diagnosing sleep disorders, but they are reasonably satisfactory for general purpose and non-clinical use.</p>","PeriodicalId":36444,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research","volume":"2 1","pages":"152-178"},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8982823/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41666-018-0013-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Computer Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Consumer sleep tracking technologies offer an unobtrusive and cost-efficient way to monitor sleep in free-living conditions. Technological advances in hardware and software have significantly improved the functionality of the new gadgets that recently appeared in the market. However, whether the latest gadgets can provide valid measurements on overall sleep parameters and sleep structure such as deep and REM sleep has not been examined. In this study, we aimed to investigate the validity of the latest consumer sleep tracking devices including an activity wristband Fitbit Charge 2 and a wearable EEG-based eye mask Neuroon in comparison to a medical sleep monitor. First, we confirmed that Fitbit Charge 2 can automatically detect the onset and offset of sleep with reasonable accuracy. Second, analysis found that both consumer devices produced comparable results in measuring total sleep duration and sleep efficiency compared to the medical device. In addition, Fitbit accurately measured the number of awakenings, while Neuroon with good signal quality had satisfactory performance on total awake time and sleep onset latency. However, measuring sleep structure including light, deep, and REM sleep remains to be challenging for both consumer devices. Third, greater discrepancies were observed between Neuroon and the medical device in nights with more disrupted sleep and when the signal quality was poor, but no trend was observed in Fitbit Charge 2. This study suggests that current consumer sleep tracking technologies may be immature for diagnosing sleep disorders, but they are reasonably satisfactory for general purpose and non-clinical use.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research serves as a publication venue for the innovative technical contributions highlighting analytics, systems, and human factors research in healthcare informatics.Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research is concerned with the application of computer science principles, information science principles, information technology, and communication technology to address problems in healthcare, and everyday wellness. Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research highlights the most cutting-edge technical contributions in computing-oriented healthcare informatics. The journal covers three major tracks: (1) analytics—focuses on data analytics, knowledge discovery, predictive modeling; (2) systems—focuses on building healthcare informatics systems (e.g., architecture, framework, design, engineering, and application); (3) human factors—focuses on understanding users or context, interface design, health behavior, and user studies of healthcare informatics applications. Topics include but are not limited to: · healthcare software architecture, framework, design, and engineering;· electronic health records· medical data mining· predictive modeling· medical information retrieval· medical natural language processing· healthcare information systems· smart health and connected health· social media analytics· mobile healthcare· medical signal processing· human factors in healthcare· usability studies in healthcare· user-interface design for medical devices and healthcare software· health service delivery· health games· security and privacy in healthcare· medical recommender system· healthcare workflow management· disease profiling and personalized treatment· visualization of medical data· intelligent medical devices and sensors· RFID solutions for healthcare· healthcare decision analytics and support systems· epidemiological surveillance systems and intervention modeling· consumer and clinician health information needs, seeking, sharing, and use· semantic Web, linked data, and ontology· collaboration technologies for healthcare· assistive and adaptive ubiquitous computing technologies· statistics and quality of medical data· healthcare delivery in developing countries· health systems modeling and simulation· computer-aided diagnosis