Jump to content

Performance Of Seven Consumer Sleep-Tracking Devices Compared With Polysomnography

From My wiki
Revision as of 16:35, 7 December 2025 by BoyceEdmonson35 (talk | contribs) (Created page with "<br>Study aims: Consumer sleep-tracking units are broadly used and [https://wiki.lovettcreations.org/index.php/What_Does_This_Involve iTag Pro] becoming extra technologically advanced, [http://www.riverbendadvisors.com/index.php?title=User:BoyceEdmonson35 iTag Pro] creating strong interest from researchers and [https://elearnportal.science/wiki/The_Advantages_Of_Mobile_Device_Tracking_For_Businesses iTag Pro] clinicians for his or her doable use as alternate options t...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)


Study aims: Consumer sleep-tracking units are broadly used and iTag Pro becoming extra technologically advanced, iTag Pro creating strong interest from researchers and iTag Pro clinicians for his or her doable use as alternate options to plain actigraphy. We, iTag Pro subsequently, tested the performance of a lot of the most recent consumer sleep-tracking devices, alongside actigraphy, versus the gold-normal sleep evaluation approach, polysomnography (PSG). Methods: In complete, 34 wholesome younger adults (22 women; 28.1 ± 3.9 years, mean ± SD) had been examined on three consecutive nights (including a disrupted sleep condition) in a sleep laboratory with PSG, iTagPro Smart Tracker together with actigraphy (Philips Respironics Actiwatch 2) and a subset of shopper sleep-tracking units. SleepScore Max) gadgets have been tested. Sleep/wake abstract and epoch-by-epoch settlement measures were in contrast with PSG. SleepScore Max) performed as well as or better than actigraphy on sleep/wake efficiency measures, whereas the Garmin devices performed worse. Overall, epoch-by-epoch sensitivity was high (all ≥0.93), specificity was low-to-medium (0.18-0.54), sleep stage comparisons were mixed, and gadgets tended to perform worse on nights with poorer/disrupted sleep. Conclusions: Consumer sleep-monitoring units exhibited excessive performance in detecting sleep, and most performed equivalent to (or better than) actigraphy in detecting wake. Device sleep stage assessments have been inconsistent. Findings indicate that many newer sleep-tracking gadgets show promising performance for monitoring sleep and wake. Devices must be examined in different populations and settings to further study their wider validity and utility.



The outcomes obtained in laboratory checks, utilizing scintillator bars read by silicon photomultipliers are reported. The present approach is the first step for designing a precision monitoring system to be positioned inside a free magnetized volume for the charge identification of low power crossing particles. The devised system is demonstrated ready to provide a spatial resolution higher than 2 mm. Scintillators, Photon Solid State detector, particle tracking devices. Among the many deliberate activities was the construction of a gentle spectrometer seated in a 20-30 m3 magnetized air volume, the Air Core Magnet (ACM). The entire design should be optimised for the dedication of the momentum and iTag Pro charge of muons within the 0.5 - 5 GeV/c vary (the mis-identification is required to be less than 3% at 0.5 GeV/c). 1.5 mm is required contained in the magnetized air volume. In this paper we report the outcomes obtained with a small array of triangular scintillator bars coupled to silicon photomultiplier (SiPM) with wavelength shifter (WLS) fibers.



This bar profile is right here demonstrated able to offer the mandatory spatial resolution in reconstructing the position of the crossing particle by profiting of the charge-sharing between adjacent bars readout in analog mode. SiPMs are wonderful candidates in changing standard photomultipliers in lots of experimental conditions. Tests have been carried out with laser beam pulses and radioactive source as a way to characterize the scintillator bar response and iTag Pro SiPM behaviour. Here we briefly current the noticed behaviour of the SiPM used in our tests regarding the main sources of noise and the impact of temperature on its response and linearity. Several fashions and packaging have been thought-about. The main source of noise which limits the SiPM’s single photon decision is the "dark current" fee. It's originated by cost carriers thermally created in the sensitive volume and current in the conduction band and therefore it will depend on the temperature.