4.7 Article

Accurate contactless sleep apnea detection framework with signal processing and machine learning methods

期刊

METHODS
卷 205, 期 -, 页码 167-178

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ymeth.2022.06.013

关键词

FMCW Radar; Sleep apnea; Machine learning

资金

  1. National Key Research and Devel- opment Program of China [2020YFC2005300]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61871224]
  3. Key Research and Development Plan of Jiangsu Province [BE2018729]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The detection of sleep apnea is crucial for evaluating sleep quality and diagnosing diseases. This paper proposes a framework for sleep apnea detection based on FMCW radar, which utilizes signal processing methods and machine learning techniques to improve detection accuracy. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed system achieves good classification performance.
The detection of sleep apnea is critical for assessing sleep quality. It is also a proven biometric in diagnosing cardiovascular and other diseases. Recent studies have shown that radar-based non-contact vital sign monitoring system can effectively detect sleep apnea. However, the detection accuracy in the current study still needs to be improved. In this paper, we propose a sleep apnea detection framework based on FMCW radar. First, the radar system is employed to record the sleep data throughout the night with polysomnography (PSG) comparison. Then, in order to extract more accurate respiratory signal from the raw radar data, the signal processing methods are investigated to solve the observed discontinuity phenomenon. Finally, machine learning methods are adopted. The apneic and not-apneic events are classified accurately by selecting effective features of respiratory signal. As shown in the experimental results, the proposed system could achieve a good classification perfor-mance with an accuracy of 95.53%, a sensitivity of 72.60%, a specificity of 97.32%, a Kappa of 0.68, and an F -score of 0.84.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据