Kang Yu Min, Gunnarsdottir Kristin M, Kerr Matthew S D, Salas Rachel M E, Ewen Joshua, Allen Richard, Gamaldo Charlene, Sarma Sridevi V
Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2015;2015:6626-9. doi: 10.1109/EMBC.2015.7319912.
In this study, we used the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index to divide the subjects into two groups, good sleepers and bad sleepers. We computed sleep behavioral (macro-sleep architectural) features and sleep spectral (micro-sleep architectural) features in order to observe if the annotated EEG data can be used to distinguish between good and bad sleepers in a more quantitative manner. Specifically, the macro-sleep features were defined by sleep stages and included sleep transitions, percentage of time spent in each sleep stage, and duration of time spent in each sleep stage. The micro-sleep features were obtained from the power spectrum of the EEG signals by computing the total power across all channels and all frequencies, as well as the average power in each sleep stage and across different frequency bands. We found that while the scoring-independent micro features are significantly different between the two groups, the macro features are not able to significantly distinguish the two groups. The fact that the macro features computed from the scoring files cannot pick up the expected difference in the EEG signals raises the question as to whether human scoring of EEG signals is practical in assessing sleep quality.
在本研究中,我们使用匹兹堡睡眠质量指数将受试者分为两组,即睡眠良好者和睡眠不佳者。我们计算了睡眠行为(宏观睡眠结构)特征和睡眠频谱(微观睡眠结构)特征,以观察标注的脑电图数据是否能够以更定量的方式区分睡眠良好者和睡眠不佳者。具体而言,宏观睡眠特征由睡眠阶段定义,包括睡眠转换、每个睡眠阶段所花费的时间百分比以及每个睡眠阶段所花费的时间持续时间。微观睡眠特征是通过计算所有通道和所有频率的总功率以及每个睡眠阶段和不同频段的平均功率,从脑电图信号的功率谱中获得的。我们发现,虽然两组之间与评分无关的微观特征存在显著差异,但宏观特征无法显著区分这两组。从评分文件计算得出的宏观特征无法发现脑电图信号中预期差异这一事实,引发了关于脑电图信号的人工评分在评估睡眠质量方面是否实用的问题。