NSRR staff
Boston, MA
0000-0002-0506-8368
Top Topics
Recent Topics
Thanks for using the site. Your choice for SHHS2 makes sense.
I also see this in MrOS (older adults): https://sleepdata.org/datasets/mros/variables/poxusual
Maybe also CFS (mostly adults; some adolescents): https://sleepdata.org/datasets/cfs/variables/desslp
There are also a couple blog posts about NSRR's harmonization efforts:
The STAGES contributor got back to me about the first question.
This question came up from another user as well which I tried to answer here: https://github.com/Stanford-STAGES/stanford-stages/issues/31 Essentially the cohorts_deid Excel file lists the studies used for the narcolepsy classification portion and not the sleep staging, however we still wanted to provide these additional EDF studies despite them not being used as controls or narcoleptics.
This question came up from another user as well which I tried to answer here: https://github.com/Stanford-STAGES/stanford-stages/issues/31
Essentially the cohorts_deid Excel file lists the studies used for the narcolepsy classification portion and not the sleep staging, however we still wanted to provide these additional EDF studies despite them not being used as controls or narcoleptics.
Unfortunately, the MESA (Exam 5) sleep journals were never entered electronically. ☹️
They were filled out on paper and scanned to PDF at the field sites. The actigraphy scorer kept the PDF open for review while scoring.
I received confirmation of the following from the STAGES data contributor:
I think the references in that supplemental documentation were discussing the possibility of using automated algorithms to further analyze the STAGES PSG data.
Hey CC - thanks for checking out the site. I agree this could be made clearer in the STAGES documentation.
Another user asked about this on the Forum last year; I provided the details I could find about the manual sleep scoring: https://sleepdata.org/forum/stages-ground-truth-hypnogram/
In short: Yes, the STAGES PSG data were scored by sleep experts.
Thanks, you're right, I should have clarified further. The "immobile time" counting is done on a continuous basis by the Actiware software, so if there were 5 minutes of immobile time before the beginning of a REST interval this can result in a value of 0 minutes of sleep latency.
I think the point I was trying to get at is that sleep latency in actigraphy was most commonly in the 0-10 minute range because the scoring rules called for REST intervals to be set approximately around the time activity counts started to decrease (in other words, around the time the subject started becoming more immobile than mobile). People are typically lying still when they start to try and fall asleep, yet (of course) the actigraphy device can't tell when the person truly transitions from wake to sleep.
The scorers did reference self-reported sleep diaries in the setting of REST intervals, however this was just one input used (others being: activity count levels; light levels; event markers). Perhaps if the sleep diary alone was used in the setting of REST intervals we might get "truer" estimates of sleep onset latency. For instance, a subject reports they got in bed and tried to sleep at 10 p.m., yet the actigraphy device still shows sporadic movement until 10:30 p.m., when the subject triggered the "5 minutes of immobile time" for sleep onset, thus giving ~30 minutes of sleep onset latency for that night.
Bottom line: sleep latency and actigraphy is very tricky!
Hey - thanks for checking in again.
I think we communicated before about your 2nd question (https://sleepdata.org/forum/mnc/1#comment-1066). I would check out the .STA files here: https://stanfordmedicine.app.box.com/s/r9e92ygq0erf7hn5re6j51aaggf50jly/folder/53209541138
I will ping the MNC data contributor about your first question regarding the SSC subjects who do not appear in the cohorts_deid file.
Good question - sleep onset latency is difficult to discern from actigraphy alone. The reason it is ~5 minutes in MESA actigraphy data is because the Actiware scoring software used a sleep onset detection method of "5 minutes of immobile time". Scorers generally set bedtime (i.e., the start of an Actiware REST interval) around the time the activity signal diminished, which typically corresponded to what ActiWare considers "immobile time" (activity counts < 2 at 30-second epochs).
We don't have any additional information to provide beyond what is available on NSRR.
Another approach to consider is to recompute onset latency from the epoch-by-epoch data using different criteria.
Hey Ethan - I sent this via email, but posting here as well!
Thanks for your interest in the resource. The SHHS baseline (Visit 1 / "index") visits took place around ~1995. Some of the cohorts tracked incident CVD outcomes up until ~2010, so most subjects have somewhere between 10-15 years of follow-up tracking those outcomes (e.g., https://sleepdata.org/datasets/shhs/variables/censdate).
The second home PSG at SHHS Visit 2 appears to have occurred ~5-7 years after the index PSG (e.g., https://sleepdata.org/datasets/shhs/variables/stdatep).
The SHHS data contributor provided some documentation of the analytic database, which appears to contain some information on any_cvd coding: https://sleepdata.org/datasets/shhs/files/m/browser/documentation/SHHS_Documentation_of_Analytic_Database.pdf?inline=1
It looks like another Forum user also asked a similar question before: https://sleepdata.org/forum/cvd-variable/