1
|
Kainec KA, Caccavaro J, Barnes M, Hoff C, Berlin A, Spencer RMC. Evaluating Accuracy in Five Commercial Sleep-Tracking Devices Compared to Research-Grade Actigraphy and Polysomnography. Sensors (Basel) 2024; 24:635. [PMID: 38276327 PMCID: PMC10820351 DOI: 10.3390/s24020635] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/27/2023] [Revised: 01/12/2024] [Accepted: 01/16/2024] [Indexed: 01/27/2024]
Abstract
The development of consumer sleep-tracking technologies has outpaced the scientific evaluation of their accuracy. In this study, five consumer sleep-tracking devices, research-grade actigraphy, and polysomnography were used simultaneously to monitor the overnight sleep of fifty-three young adults in the lab for one night. Biases and limits of agreement were assessed to determine how sleep stage estimates for each device and research-grade actigraphy differed from polysomnography-derived measures. Every device, except the Garmin Vivosmart, was able to estimate total sleep time comparably to research-grade actigraphy. All devices overestimated nights with shorter wake times and underestimated nights with longer wake times. For light sleep, absolute bias was low for the Fitbit Inspire and Fitbit Versa. The Withings Mat and Garmin Vivosmart overestimated shorter light sleep and underestimated longer light sleep. The Oura Ring underestimated light sleep of any duration. For deep sleep, bias was low for the Withings Mat and Garmin Vivosmart while other devices overestimated shorter and underestimated longer times. For REM sleep, bias was low for all devices. Taken together, these results suggest that proportional bias patterns in consumer sleep-tracking technologies are prevalent and could have important implications for their overall accuracy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kyle A. Kainec
- Neuroscience & Behavior Program, French Hall, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 230 Stockbridge Road, Amherst, MA 01003, USA;
- Institute for Applied Life Sciences, Life Science Laboratories, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 240 Thatcher Road, Amherst, MA 01003, USA; (M.B.); (C.H.)
| | - Jamie Caccavaro
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Tobin Hall, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 135 Hicks Way, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
| | - Morgan Barnes
- Institute for Applied Life Sciences, Life Science Laboratories, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 240 Thatcher Road, Amherst, MA 01003, USA; (M.B.); (C.H.)
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Tobin Hall, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 135 Hicks Way, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
| | - Chloe Hoff
- Institute for Applied Life Sciences, Life Science Laboratories, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 240 Thatcher Road, Amherst, MA 01003, USA; (M.B.); (C.H.)
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Tobin Hall, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 135 Hicks Way, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
| | - Annika Berlin
- Institute for Applied Life Sciences, Life Science Laboratories, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 240 Thatcher Road, Amherst, MA 01003, USA; (M.B.); (C.H.)
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Tobin Hall, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 135 Hicks Way, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
| | - Rebecca M. C. Spencer
- Neuroscience & Behavior Program, French Hall, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 230 Stockbridge Road, Amherst, MA 01003, USA;
- Institute for Applied Life Sciences, Life Science Laboratories, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 240 Thatcher Road, Amherst, MA 01003, USA; (M.B.); (C.H.)
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Tobin Hall, University of Massachusetts Amherst, 135 Hicks Way, Amherst, MA 01003, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chaudhry FF, Danieletto M, Golden E, Scelza J, Botwin G, Shervey M, De Freitas JK, Paranjpe I, Nadkarni GN, Miotto R, Glowe P, Stock G, Percha B, Zimmerman N, Dudley JT, Glicksberg BS. Sleep in the Natural Environment: A Pilot Study. Sensors (Basel) 2020; 20:E1378. [PMID: 32138289 DOI: 10.3390/s20051378] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2020] [Revised: 02/27/2020] [Accepted: 02/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Sleep quality has been directly linked to cognitive function, quality of life, and a variety of serious diseases across many clinical domains. Standard methods for assessing sleep involve overnight studies in hospital settings, which are uncomfortable, expensive, not representative of real sleep, and difficult to conduct on a large scale. Recently, numerous commercial digital devices have been developed that record physiological data, such as movement, heart rate, and respiratory rate, which can act as a proxy for sleep quality in lieu of standard electroencephalogram recording equipment. The sleep-related output metrics from these devices include sleep staging and total sleep duration and are derived via proprietary algorithms that utilize a variety of these physiological recordings. Each device company makes different claims of accuracy and measures different features of sleep quality, and it is still unknown how well these devices correlate with one another and perform in a research setting. In this pilot study of 21 participants, we investigated whether sleep metric outputs from self-reported sleep metrics (SRSMs) and four sensors, specifically Fitbit Surge (a smart watch), Withings Aura (a sensor pad that is placed under a mattress), Hexoskin (a smart shirt), and Oura Ring (a smart ring), were related to known cognitive and psychological metrics, including the n-back test and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). We analyzed correlation between multiple device-related sleep metrics. Furthermore, we investigated relationships between these sleep metrics and cognitive scores across different timepoints and SRSM through univariate linear regressions. We found that correlations for sleep metrics between the devices across the sleep cycle were almost uniformly low, but still significant (p < 0.05). For cognitive scores, we found the Withings latency was statistically significant for afternoon and evening timepoints at p = 0.016 and p = 0.013. We did not find any significant associations between SRSMs and PSQI or cognitive scores. Additionally, Oura Ring’s total sleep duration and efficiency in relation to the PSQI measure was statistically significant at p = 0.004 and p = 0.033, respectively. These findings can hopefully be used to guide future sensor-based sleep research.
Collapse
|