Dataset Information

Performance of Fitbit Charge 3 against polysomnography in measuring sleep in adolescent boys and girls.

ABSTRACT: We evaluated the performance of Fitbit Charge 3™ (FC3), a multi-sensor commercial sleep-tracker, for measuring sleep in adolescents against gold-standard laboratory polysomnography (PSG). Single-night PSG and FC3 sleep outcomes were compared in thirty-nine adolescents (22 girls; 16-19 years), 12 of whom presented with clinical/subclinical DSM-5 insomnia symptoms (7 girls). Discrepancy analysis, Bland-Altman plots, and epoch-by-epoch analyses were used to evaluate FC3 performance. The influence of several factors potentially affecting FC3 performance (e.g., sex, age, body mass index, firmware version, and magnitude of heart rate changes between consecutive PSG epochs) was also tested. In the sample of healthy adolescents, FC3 systematically underestimated PSG total sleep time by about 11 min and sleep efficiency by 2.5%, and overestimated wake after sleep onset by 9 min. Proportional biases were detected for "light" and "deep" sleep duration, resulting in significant underestimation of these parameters for those participants having longer PSG N1+ N2 and N3 durations, respectively. No significant systematic bias was detected for sleep efficiency and sleep onset latency. Epoch-by-epoch analysis showed sleep-stage sensitivity (average proportion of PSG epochs correctly classified by the device for a given sleep stage) of 68% for wake, 78% for "light" sleep, 59% for "deep" sleep, and 69% for rapid eye movement (REM) sleep in healthy sleepers. Similar results were found in the sample of adolescents with insomnia symptoms. Body mass index was positively associated with FC3-PSG discrepancies in wake after sleep onset (R² = .16, p = .048). The magnitude of the heart rate acceleration/deceleration between consecutive PSG epochs was an important factor affecting FC3 classifications of sleep stages. Our results are in line with a general trend in the literature, suggesting better performance for the recently introduced multi-sensor devices compared to motion-only devices, although further developments are needed to improve accuracy in sleep stage classification and wake detection. Further insight is needed to determine factors potentially affecting device performance, such as accuracy and reliability (consistency of performance over time), in different samples and conditions.

SUBMITTER: Menghini L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8255273 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite being the gold-standard method for objectively assessing sleep, polysomnography (PSG) faces several limitations as it is expensive, time-consuming, and labor-intensive; requires various equipment and technical expertise; and is impractical for long-term or in-home use. Consumer wrist-worn wearables are able to monitor sleep parameters and thus could be used as an alternative for PSG. Consequently, wearables gained immense popularity over the past few years, but their accuracy has been a major concern.ObjectiveA systematic review of the literature was conducted to appraise the performance of 3 recent-generation wearable devices (Fitbit Charge 4, Garmin Vivosmart 4, and WHOOP) in determining sleep parameters and sleep stages.MethodsPer the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, a comprehensive search was conducted using the PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase databases. Eligible publications were those that (1) involved the validity of sleep data of any marketed model of the candidate wearables and (2) used PSG or an ambulatory electroencephalogram monitor as a reference sleep monitoring device. Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) incorporated a sleep diary or survey method as a reference, (2) review paper, (3) children as participants, and (4) duplicate publication of the same data and findings.ResultsThe search yielded 504 candidate articles. After eliminating duplicates and applying the eligibility criteria, 8 articles were included. WHOOP showed the least disagreement relative to PSG and Sleep Profiler for total sleep time (-1.4 min), light sleep (-9.6 min), and deep sleep (-9.3 min) but showed the largest disagreement for rapid eye movement (REM) sleep (21.0 min). Fitbit Charge 4 and Garmin Vivosmart 4 both showed moderate accuracy in assessing sleep stages and total sleep time compared to PSG. Fitbit Charge 4 showed the least disagreement for REM sleep (4.0 min) relative to PSG. Additionally, Fitbit Charge 4 showed higher sensitivities to deep sleep (75%) and REM sleep (86.5%) compared to Garmin Vivosmart 4 and WHOOP.ConclusionsThe findings of this systematic literature review indicate that the devices with higher relative agreement and sensitivities to multistate sleep (ie, Fitbit Charge 4 and WHOOP) seem appropriate for deriving suitable estimates of sleep parameters. However, analyses regarding the multistate categorization of sleep indicate that all devices can benefit from further improvement in the assessment of specific sleep stages. Although providers are continuously developing new versions and variants of wearables, the scientific research on these wearables remains considerably limited. This scarcity in literature not only reduces our ability to draw definitive conclusions but also highlights the need for more targeted research in this domain. Additionally, future research endeavors should strive for standardized protocols including larger sample sizes to enhance the comparability and power of the results across studies.

Project description:BackgroundMultisensor fitness trackers offer the ability to longitudinally estimate sleep quality in a home environment with the potential to outperform traditional actigraphy. To benefit from these new tools for objectively assessing sleep for clinical and research purposes, multisensor wearable devices require careful validation against the gold standard of sleep polysomnography (PSG). Naturalistic studies favor validation.ObjectiveThis study aims to validate the Fitbit Charge 2 against portable home PSG in a shift-work population composed of 59 first responder police officers and paramedics undergoing shift work.MethodsA reliable comparison between the two measurements was ensured through the data-driven alignment of a PSG and Fitbit time series that was recorded at night. Epoch-by-epoch analyses and Bland-Altman plots were used to assess sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, the Matthews correlation coefficient, bias, and limits of agreement.ResultsSleep onset and offset, total sleep time, and the durations of rapid eye movement (REM) sleep and non-rapid-eye movement sleep stages N1+N2 and N3 displayed unbiased estimates with nonnegligible limits of agreement. In contrast, the proprietary Fitbit algorithm overestimated REM sleep latency by 29.4 minutes and wakefulness after sleep onset (WASO) by 37.1 minutes. Epoch-by-epoch analyses indicated better specificity than sensitivity, with higher accuracies for WASO (0.82) and REM sleep (0.86) than those for N1+N2 (0.55) and N3 (0.78) sleep. Fitbit heart rate (HR) displayed a small underestimation of 0.9 beats per minute (bpm) and a limited capability to capture sudden HR changes because of the lower time resolution compared to that of PSG. The underestimation was smaller in N2, N3, and REM sleep (0.6-0.7 bpm) than in N1 sleep (1.2 bpm) and wakefulness (1.9 bpm), indicating a state-specific bias. Finally, Fitbit suggested a distribution of all sleep episode durations that was different from that derived from PSG and showed nonbiological discontinuities, indicating the potential limitations of the staging algorithm.ConclusionsWe conclude that by following careful data processing processes, the Fitbit Charge 2 can provide reasonably accurate mean values of sleep and HR estimates in shift workers under naturalistic conditions. Nevertheless, the generally wide limits of agreement hamper the precision of quantifying individual sleep episodes. The value of this consumer-grade multisensor wearable in terms of tackling clinical and research questions could be enhanced with open-source algorithms, raw data access, and the ability to blind participants to their own sleep data.

Dataset Information

Performance of Fitbit Charge 3 against polysomnography in measuring sleep in adolescent boys and girls.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets