Comparison of five actigraphy scoring methods with bipolar disorder.

Comparison of five actigraphy scoring methods with bipolar disorder.
复制标题

DOI:
10.1080/15402002.2012.685997
复制
发表时间:
2013
影响因子:
3.1
通讯作者:
Germain A
Germain A
中科院分区:
医学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Boudebesse C;Leboyer M;Begley A;Wood A;Miewald J;Hall M;Frank E;Kupfer D;Germain A

文献摘要

参考文献

相似文献

本研究的目的是在18例双相情感障碍缓解患者的样本中比较五种腕动计评分方法。使用依赖于睡眠日记、事件标记、软件提供的自动算法、由事件标记补充的自动算法、仅目视检查(VI)的五种不同评分方法处理体动记录。对于许多感兴趣的体动记录参数,算法和VI方法与其他方法不同。特别是,与其他方法相比,算法方法产生更长的睡眠持续时间,VI方法产生更短的睡眠潜伏期。目前的研究结果提供了基于感兴趣的睡眠参数,时间线索来源和可用性,以及相关的评分时间成本的研究的信号处理方法的选择指导。
The goal of this study was to compare five actigraphy scoring methods in a sample of 18 remitted patients with bipolar disorder. Actigraphy records were processed using five different scoring methods relying on the sleep diary; the event-marker; the software-provided automatic algorithm; the automatic algorithm supplemented by the event-marker; visual inspection (VI) only. The Algorithm and the VI methods differed from the other methods for many actigraphy parameters of interest. Particularly, the Algorithm method yielded longer sleep duration, and the VI method yielded shorter sleep latency compared to the others methods. The present findings provide guidance for the selection of signal processing method based on sleep parameters of interest, time-cue sources and availability, and related scoring time costs for the study.
DOI: 10.1097/00019442-199622430-00007
发表时间: 1996-06-01
影响因子: 7.2
作者:
Samuels, SC;Katz, IR;DiFilippo, S
通讯作者: DiFilippo, S
DOI: 10.1089/104454603322572589
发表时间: 2003-09-01
影响因子: 1.9
作者:
Axelson, DA;Bertocci, MA;Dahl, RE
通讯作者: Dahl, RE
DOI: 10.1016/s0165-0327(03)00055-7
发表时间: 2004-06-01
影响因子: 6.6
作者:
Millar, A;Espie, CA;Scott, J
通讯作者: Scott, J
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2869.1994.tb00114.x
发表时间: 1994-06-01
影响因子: 4.4
作者:
MONK, TH;REYNOLDS, CF;RITENOUR, AM
通讯作者: RITENOUR, AM
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.133.5.429
发表时间: 1978-01-01
影响因子: 10.5
作者:
YOUNG, RC;BIGGS, JT;MEYER, DA
通讯作者: MEYER, DA