Document Type




Format of Original

6 p.

Publication Date




Source Publication

Journal of Neuroscience Methods

Source ISSN


Original Item ID

DOI: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.01.023


Background: In addition to the cost and complexity of processing multiple signal channels, manual sleep staging is also tedious, time consuming, and error-prone. The aim of this paper is to propose an automatic slow wave sleep (SWS) detection method that uses only one channel of the electroencephalography (EEG) signal.

New Method: The proposed approach distinguishes itself from previous automatic sleep staging methods by using three specially designed feature groups. The first feature group characterizes the waveform pattern of the EEG signal. The remaining two feature groups are developed to resolve the difficulties caused by interpersonal EEG signal differences.

Results and comparison with existing methods: The proposed approach was tested with 1,003 subjects, and the SWS detection results show kappa coefficient at 0.66, an accuracy level of 0.973, a sensitivity score of 0.644 and a positive predictive value of 0.709. By excluding sleep apnea patients and persons whose age is older than 55, the SWS detection results improved to kappa coefficient, 0.76; accuracy, 0.963; sensitivity, 0.758; and positive predictive value, 0.812.

Conclusions: With newly developed signal features, this study proposed and tested a single-channel EEG-based SWS detection method. The effectiveness of the proposed approach was demonstrated by applying it to detect the SWS of 1003 subjects. Our test results show that a low SWS ratio and sleep apnea can degrade the performance of SWS detection. The results also show that a large and accurately staged sleep dataset is of great importance when developing automatic sleep staging methods.


Accepted version. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, Vol 243 (March 30, 2015): 47-52. DOI. © 2015 Elsevier. Used with permission.

NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Neuroscience Methods. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Neuroscience Methods, Vol 243 (March 30, 2015): 47-52. DOI.