Neckelmann D, Olsen O E, Fagerland S, Ursin R
Department of Physiology, University of Bergen, Norway.
Sleep. 1994 Mar;17(2):120-31. doi: 10.1093/sleep/17.2.120.
The present paper has three major objectives: first, to document the reliability of a published criteria set for sleep/wake scoring in the rat; second, to develop a computer algorithm implementation of the criteria set; and third, to document the reliability and functional validity of the computer algorithm for sleep/wake scoring. The reliability of the visual criteria was assessed by letting two raters separately score 8 hours of polygraph records from the light period from five rats (14,040 10-second scoring epochs). Scored stages were waking, slow-wave sleep-1, slow-wave sleep-2, transition type sleep and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep. The visual criteria had good interrater reliability [Cohen's kappa (kappa) = 0.68], with 92.6% agreement on the waking/nonrapid eye movement (NREM) sleep/REM sleep distinction (kappa = 0.89). This indicated that the criteria allow separate raters to independently classify sleep/wake stages with very good agreement. An independent group of 10 rats was used for development of an algorithm for semiautomatic computer scoring. A close implementation of the visual criteria was chosen. The algorithm was based on power spectral densities from two electroencephalogram (EEG) leads and on electromyogram (EMG) activity. Five 2-second fast Fourier transform (FFT) epochs from each EEG/EMG lead per 10-second sleep/wake scoring epoch were used to take the spatial and temporal context into account. The same group of five rats used in visual scoring was used to appraise reliability of computerized scoring. The computer score was compared with the visual score for each rater. There was a lower agreement (kappa = 0.57 and 0.62 for the two raters) than in interrater visual scoring [percent agreement 87.7 and 89.1% (kappa = 0.82 and 0.84) in the waking/NREM sleep/REM sleep distinction]. Subsequently, the computer scores of the raters were compared. The interrater reliability was better than the interrater reliability for visual scoring (kappa = 0.75), with 92.4% agreement for the waking/NREM sleep/REM sleep distinction (kappa = 0.89). The computer scoring algorithm was applied to data from a third independent group of rats (n = 6) from an acoustical stimulus arousal threshold experiment, to assess the functional validity of the scoring directly with respect to arousal threshold. The computer algorithm scoring performed as well as the original visual sleep/wake stage scoring. This indicated that the lower intrarater reliability did not have a significant negative influence on the functional validity of the sleep/wake score.
第一,记录已发表的大鼠睡眠/觉醒评分标准集的可靠性;第二,开发该标准集的计算机算法实现;第三,记录用于睡眠/觉醒评分的计算机算法的可靠性和功能有效性。通过让两名评分者分别对五只大鼠光照期8小时的多导记录进行评分(14,040个10秒评分时段),评估视觉标准的可靠性。评分阶段包括觉醒、慢波睡眠-1、慢波睡眠-2、过渡型睡眠和快速眼动(REM)睡眠。视觉标准具有良好的评分者间可靠性[科恩kappa系数(kappa)=0.68],在觉醒/非快速眼动(NREM)睡眠/REM睡眠区分上的一致性为92.6%(kappa=0.89)。这表明该标准允许不同评分者以非常高的一致性独立分类睡眠/觉醒阶段。一组独立的10只大鼠用于开发半自动计算机评分算法。选择了与视觉标准紧密匹配的实现方式。该算法基于来自两个脑电图(EEG)导联的功率谱密度和肌电图(EMG)活动。每10秒睡眠/觉醒评分时段从每个EEG/EMG导联取5个2秒的快速傅里叶变换(FFT)时段,以考虑空间和时间背景。用于视觉评分的同一组五只大鼠用于评估计算机评分的可靠性。将计算机评分与每个评分者的视觉评分进行比较。与评分者间视觉评分相比,一致性较低(两名评分者的kappa分别为0.57和0.62)[在觉醒/NREM睡眠/REM睡眠区分上的一致性百分比分别为87.7%和89.1%(kappa分别为0.82和0.84)]。随后,比较评分者的计算机评分。评分者间可靠性优于视觉评分的评分者间可靠性(kappa=0.75),在觉醒/NREM睡眠/REM睡眠区分上的一致性为92.4%(kappa=0.89)。将计算机评分算法应用于来自声学刺激觉醒阈值实验的第三组独立大鼠(n=6)的数据,以直接评估评分相对于觉醒阈值的功能有效性。计算机算法评分与原始视觉睡眠/觉醒阶段评分表现相当。这表明较低的评分者内可靠性对睡眠/觉醒评分的功能有效性没有显著负面影响。