METHODS: This article provides a comprehensive review of automated sleep stage scoring systems, which were created since the year 2000. The systems were developed for Electrocardiogram (ECG), Electroencephalogram (EEG), Electrooculogram (EOG), and a combination of signals.

RESULTS: Our review shows that all of these signals contain information for sleep stage scoring.

METHODS: An initial bibliometric analysis shows that the reviewed papers focused on Electromyogram(EMG), Electroencephalogram(EEG), Electrocardiogram(ECG), and Electrooculogram(EOG). These four categories were used to structure the subsequent content review.

RESULTS: During the content review, we understood that deep learning performs better for big and varied datasets than classic analysis and machine classification methods. Deep learning algorithms try to develop the model by using all the available input.

METHODS: CFAE from several atrial sites, recorded for a duration of 16 s, were acquired from 10 patients with persistent and 9 patients with paroxysmal AF. These signals were appraised using non-overlapping windows of 1-, 2- and 4-s durations. The resulting data sets were analyzed with Recurrence Plots (RP) and Recurrence Quantification Analysis (RQA). The data was also quantified via entropy measures.

RESULTS: RQA exhibited unique plots for persistent versus paroxysmal AF. Similar patterns were observed to be repeated throughout the RPs. Trends were consistent for signal segments of 1 and 2 s as well as 4 s in duration. This was suggestive that the underlying signal generation process is also repetitive, and that repetitiveness can be detected even in 1-s sequences. The results also showed that most entropy metrics exhibited higher measurement values (closer to equilibrium) for persistent AF data. It was also found that Determinism (DET), Trapping Time (TT), and Modified Multiscale Entropy (MMSE), extracted from signals that were acquired from locations at the posterior atrial free wall, are highly discriminative of persistent versus paroxysmal AF data.

METHODS: We investigated the existing body of evidence and applied Preferred Reporting Items for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to search records in IEEE, Google scholar, and PubMed databases. We identified 65 papers that were published from 2013 to 2022 and these papers cover 67 different studies. The review process was structured according to the medical data that was used for disease detection. We identified six main categories, namely air flow, genetic, imaging, signals, and miscellaneous. For each of these categories, we report both disease detection methods and their performance.

RESULTS: We found that medical imaging was used in 14 of the reviewed studies as data for automated obstructive airway disease detection. Genetics and physiological signals were used in 13 studies. Medical records and air flow were used in 9 and 7 studies, respectively. Most papers were published in 2020 and we found three times more work on Machine Learning (ML) when compared to Deep Learning (DL). Statistical analysis shows that DL techniques achieve higher Accuracy (ACC) when compared to ML. Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) is the most common DL classifier and Support Vector Machine (SVM) is the most widely used ML classifier. During our review, we discovered only two publicly available asthma and COPD datasets. Most studies used private clinical datasets, so data size and data composition are inconsistent.