The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 9:30 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 1 hour.
2019 41st Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) 2019
DOI: 10.1109/embc.2019.8857678
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hybrid in-phase and continuous auditory stimulation significantly enhances slow wave activity during sleep

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The CLNS phase targeting accuracy (phase error (mean = 3.8°, SD = 58°, VAR = 29.25°) in this study) offers very precise targeting of SO. Additionally, most previous studies delivered pairs or trains of acoustic stimuli, with only the first one targeted based on the analysis of EEG, and subsequent stimuli following the initial one at fixed 1 s intervals 43,44 . However, phase targeting accuracy seems to be a crucial component for boosting SO and any deviation could instead lead to hinderance of SO.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The CLNS phase targeting accuracy (phase error (mean = 3.8°, SD = 58°, VAR = 29.25°) in this study) offers very precise targeting of SO. Additionally, most previous studies delivered pairs or trains of acoustic stimuli, with only the first one targeted based on the analysis of EEG, and subsequent stimuli following the initial one at fixed 1 s intervals 43,44 . However, phase targeting accuracy seems to be a crucial component for boosting SO and any deviation could instead lead to hinderance of SO.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Two studies have been performed in the sleep-disordered population using frontal channels in wearable EEG, both showing κ = .67 agreement levels (Lucey et al, 2016;Levendowski et al, 2017). It should be noted that also lower inter-rater reliability for manual scoring of the recordings is reported (κ = .69 in Garcia-Molina et al, 2019;κ = .70 in Levendowski et al, 2017;κ = .78 in Popovic et al, 2014), suggesting an upper limit to the sleep staging information extracted from wearable frontal electrodes.…”
Section: Single-channel (Wearable) Eegmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The current device did not equip EOG electrodes to assess REM sleep, relying on the automatic sleep stager to classify REM sleep. The performance of the automatic sleep stager in the device was compared to manual scoring of the devices' raw EEG data in (Garcia-Molina et al, 2019). This study showed kappa scores of 0.65 to 0.67, compared to an inter-rater agreement of 0.69, indicating that the device's automated stager performed equally to manual scoring.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 90%