ABSTRACT

Demonstrating inter-device reliability is essential to use devices interchangeably, and accurately integrate, interpret, or compare data from different actigraphs. Despite this, there is a paucity of comparative literature over a timeframe exceeding one night. The aims of this study were to determine an optimal wake threshold for GENEActiv and to evaluate the concordance between Actiwatch-2 and GENEActiv using a common algorithm (Phillips Respironics). Data were collected from 33 individuals (20 female) aged 20–35 years (M= 25.33, SD = 4.69) across a total 213 nights. Participants wore both devices simultaneously and continuously for seven days. The sleep parameters of interest were: total sleep time, sleep efficiency, sleep onset latency, and wake after sleep onset. Exploratory analyses of sensitivity, specificity, overall accuracy, mean bias, and paired samples t-tests indicated an optimal wake threshold of 115 for GENEActiv, compared with Actiwatch-2 at the 40 (medium, default) threshold. Using these thresholds, sensitivity, and overall accuracy of GENEActiv were both good (86% and 78%, respectively), however specificity was relatively low (40%). There were no significant inter-device differences for any sleep parameters, and all absolute mean biases were small. Overall, the findings from this study provide the first empirical evidence to support the reliability of GENEActiv against Actiwatch-2 over multiple nights using a common algorithm with device-specific wake thresholds.

摘要

展示设备间的可靠性对于可互换使用设备以及准确整合、解释或比较来自不同活动记录仪的数据至关重要。尽管如此，在超过一晚的时间范围内，比较文学还是很缺乏的。本研究的目的是确定 GENEActiv 的最佳尾流阈值，并使用通用算法 (Phillips Respironics) 评估 Actiwatch-2 和 GENEActiv 之间的一致性。数据来自 33 名 20-35 岁的个体（20 名女性）（M = 25.33，SD =4.69) 共 213 晚。参与者同时连续佩戴这两种设备 7 天。感兴趣的睡眠参数是：总睡眠时间、睡眠效率、入睡潜伏期和入睡后醒来。敏感性、特异性、总体准确度、平均偏差和配对样本 t 检验的探索性分析表明 GENEActiv 的最佳唤醒阈值为 115，而 Actiwatch-2 的阈值为 40（中等，默认）。使用这些阈值，GENEActiv 的灵敏度和总体准确度都很好（分别为 86% 和 78%），但特异性相对较低（40%）。任何睡眠参数都没有显着的设备间差异，并且所有绝对平均偏差都很小。全面的，