{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.051753881541115584, 'fraction_numerical': 0.023001725129384705, 'mean_word_length': 5.062717770034843, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Sleep Validity of a Non-Contact Bedside Movement and Respiration-Sensing Device.

STUDY OBJECTIVES
To assess the sleep detection and staging validity of a non-contact, commercially available bedside bio-motion sensing device (S+, ResMed) and evaluate the impact of algorithm updates.


METHODS
Polysomnography data from 27 healthy adult participants was compared epoch-by-epoch to synchronized data that were recorded and staged by actigraphy and S+. An update to the S+ algorithm (common in the rapidly evolving commercial sleep tracker industry) permitted comparison of the original (S+V1) and updated (S+V2) versions.


RESULTS
Sleep detection accuracy by S+V1 (93.3%), S+V2 (93.8%), and actigraphy (96.0%) was high; wake detection accuracy by each (69.6%, 73.1%, and 47.9%, respectively) was low. Higher overall S+ specificity, compared to actigraphy, was driven by higher accuracy in detecting wake before sleep onset (WBSO), which differed between S+V2 (90.4%) and actigraphy (46.5%). Stage detection accuracy by the S+ did not exceed 67.6% (for stage N2 sleep, by S+V2) for any stage. Performance is compared to previously established variance in polysomnography scored by humans: a performance standard which commercial devices should ideally strive to reach.


CONCLUSIONS
Similar limitations in detecting wake after sleep onset (WASO) were found for the S+ as have been previously reported for actigraphy and other commercial sleep tracking devices. S+ WBSO detection was higher than actigraphy, and S+V2 algorithm further improved WASO accuracy. Researchers and clinicians should remain aware of the potential for algorithm updates to impact validity.


COMMENTARY
A commentary on this article appears in this issue on page 935.