4.6 Article

Prediction of the Sleep Apnea Severity Using 2D-Convolutional Neural Networks and Respiratory Effort Signals

期刊

DIAGNOSTICS
卷 13, 期 20, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics13203187

关键词

central sleep apnea; obstructive sleep apnea; abdominal respiratory signal; thoracic respiratory signal; convolutional neural network; deep learning

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study developed a 2D-convolutional neural network model using thoracic and abdominal movement signals to automatically estimate the severity of sleep apnea and evaluate the contribution of central respiratory events. The model achieved high accuracy and low error rates in estimating the apnea-hypopnea index, especially for central apnea events.
The high prevalence of sleep apnea and the limitations of polysomnography have prompted the investigation of strategies aimed at automated diagnosis using a restricted number of physiological measures. This study aimed to demonstrate that thoracic (THO) and abdominal (ABD) movement signals are useful for accurately estimating the severity of sleep apnea, even if central respiratory events are present. Thus, we developed 2D-convolutional neural networks (CNNs) jointly using THO and ABD to automatically estimate sleep apnea severity and evaluate the central event contribution. Our proposal achieved an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.75 and a root mean square error (RMSE) = 10.33 events/h when estimating the apnea-hypopnea index, and ICC = 0.83 and RMSE = 0.95 events/h when estimating the central apnea index. The CNN obtained accuracies of 94.98%, 79.82%, and 81.60% for 5, 15, and 30 events/h when evaluating the complete apnea hypopnea index. The model improved when the nature of the events was central: 98.72% and 99.74% accuracy for 5 and 15 events/h. Hence, the information extracted from these signals using CNNs could be a powerful tool to diagnose sleep apnea, especially in subjects with a high density of central apnea events.

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

4.6
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