bioRxiv Science⌕ Search

Biology subjects

Brandewinder, M.

Publications and source records attributed to Brandewinder, M..

2 recordsLinked to original sources
bioRxiv2020

Regular caffeine intake attenuates REM sleep promotion and sleep quality in healthy men

Acute caffeine intake can attenuate homeostatic sleep pressure and worsen sleep quality. Besides, caffeine intake - particularly in high doses and close to bedtime - may also affect circadian-regulated REM sleep promotion, an important determinant of subjective sleep quality. However, it is not known whether such changes persist under chronic caffeine consumption during daytime. Twenty male caffeine consumers (26.4 {+/-} 4 years old, habitual caffeine intake 478.1 {+/-} 102.8 mg/day) participated in a double-blind crossover study. Each volunteer completed a caffeine (3 x 150 mg caffeine daily), a withdrawal (3 x 150 mg caffeine for eight days then placebo), and a placebo condition. After ten days of controlled intake and a fixed sleep-wake cycle, we recorded 8 h of electroencephalography starting 5 h after habitual bedtime (i.e., start on average at 04:22 am which is around the peak of circadian REM sleep promotion). A 60 min evening nap preceded each sleep episode and reduced high sleep pressure levels. While total sleep time and sleep architecture did not significantly differ between the three conditions, REM latency was longer after daily caffeine intake compared to both placebo and withdrawal. Moreover, the accumulation of REM sleep proportion was slower, and volunteers reported more difficulties at awakening after sleep and feeling more tired upon wake-up in the caffeine condition compared to placebo. Our data indicate that besides acute also regular daytime caffeine intake affects REM sleep regulation in men. We have evidence that regular caffeine intake during daytime weakens circadian sleep promotion when compared to placebo. Moreover, the observed caffeine-induced deterioration in the quality of awakening may suggest a potential motive to reinstate caffeine intake after sleep.

neuroscience↗
bioRxiv2019

Looking for a reference for large datasets: relative reliability of visual and automatic sleep scoring

Study ObjectivesNew challenges in sleep science require to describe fine grain phenomena or to deal with large datasets. Beside the human resource challenge of scoring huge datasets, the inter- and intra-expert variability may also reduce the sensitivity of such studies. Searching for a way to disentangle the variability induced by the scoring method from the actual variability in the data, visual and automatic sleep scorings of healthy individuals were examined.\n\nMethodsA first dataset (DS1, 4 recordings) scored by 6 experts plus an autoscoring algorithm was used to characterize inter-scoring variability. A second dataset (DS2, 88 recordings) scored a few weeks later was used to investigate intra-expert variability. Percentage agreements and Congers kappa were derived from epoch-by-epoch comparisons on pairwise, consensus and majority scorings.\n\nResultsOn DS1 the number of epochs of agreement decreased when the number of expert increased, in both majority and consensus scoring, where agreement ranged from 86% (pairwise) to 69% (all experts). Adding autoscoring to visual scorings changed the kappa value from 0.81 to 0.79. Agreement between expert consensus and autoscoring was 93%. On DS2 intra-expert variability was evidenced by the kappa systematic decrease between autoscoring and each single expert between datasets (0.75 to 0.70).\n\nConclusionsVisual scoring induces inter- and intra-expert variability, which is difficult to address especially in big data studies. When proven to be reliable and if perfectly reproducible, autoscoring methods can cope with intra-scorer variability making them a sensible option when dealing with large datasets.\n\nStatement of SignificanceWe confirmed and extended previous findings highlighting the intra- and inter-expert variability in visual sleep scoring. On large datasets those variability issues cannot be completely addressed by neither practical nor statistical solutions such as group training, majority or consensus scoring.\n\nWhen an automated scoring method can be proven to be as reasonably imperfect as visual scoring but perfectly reproducible, it can serve as a reliable scoring reference for sleep studies.

neuroscience↗