Study Objective:Sleep is reflected not only in the electroencephalogram but also in heart rhythms and breathing patterns. Therefore, we hypothesize that it is possible to accurately stage sleep based on the electrocardiogram (ECG) and respiratory signals.Methods: Using a dataset including 8,682 polysomnographs, we develop deep neural networks to stage sleep from ECG and respiratory signals. Five deep neural networks consisting of convolutional networks and long short-term memory networks are trained to stage sleep using heart and breathing, including the timing of R peaks from ECG, abdominal and chest respiratory effort, and the combinations of these signals.Results: ECG in combination with the abdominal respiratory effort achieve the best performance for staging all five sleep stages with a Cohen's kappa of 0.600 (95% confidence interval 0.599 -0.602); and 0.762 (0.760 -0.763) for discriminating awake vs. rapid eye movement vs. non-rapid eye movement sleep. The performance is better for young participants and for those with a low apnea-hypopnea index, while it is robust for commonly used outpatient medications. Conclusions:Our results validate that ECG and respiratory effort provide substantial information about sleep stages in a large population. It opens new possibilities in sleep research and applications where electroencephalography is not readily available or may be infeasible, such as in critically ill patients. Deep Network ArchitectureWe trained five deep neural networks based on the following input signals and their combinations: 1) ECG; 2) CHEST (chest respiratory effort); 3) ABD (abdominal respiratory effort); 4) ECG+CHEST; and 5) ECG+ABD. Each deep neural network contained a feed-forward convolutional neural network (CNN) which learned features pertaining to each epoch, and a recurrent neural network (RNN), in this case long-short term memory (LSTM), to learn temporal patterns among consecutive epochs.The CNN of the network is similar to that in Hannun et al. 20 . As shown in Figure 1A and Figure 1B, the network for a single type of input signal, i.e. ECG, CHEST or ABD, consists of a convolutional layer, several residual blocks and a final output block. For a network with both ECG and CHEST/ABD as input signals ( Figure 1C), we first fixed the weights of the layers up to the 9 th residual block (gray) for the ECG network and similarly fixed up to the 5 th residual block (gray) for the CHEST/ABD network, concatenated the outputs, and then fed this concatenation into a subnetwork containing five residual blocks and a final output block. The numbers of fixed layers were chosen so that the outputs of layers from different modalities have the same shape (after padding zeros), and were then concatenated.The LSTM of the network has the same structure for different input signals. It is a bi-directional LSTM, where the context cells from the forward and backward directions are concatenated. For the network

Background We sought to develop an automatable score to predict hospitalization, critical illness, or death for patients at risk for COVID-19 presenting for urgent care. Methods We developed the COVID-19 Acuity Score (CoVA) based on a single-center study of adult outpatients seen in respiratory illness clinics (RICs) or the emergency department (ED). Data was extracted from the Partners Enterprise Data Warehouse, and split into development (n = 9381, March 7-May 2) and prospective (n = 2205, May 3-14) cohorts. Outcomes were hospitalization, critical illness (ICU or ventilation), or death within 7 days. Calibration was assessed using the expected-to-observed event ratio (E/O). Discrimination was assessed by area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). Results In the prospective cohort, 26.1%, 6.3%, and 0.5% of patients experienced hospitalization, critical illness, or death, respectively. CoVA showed excellent performance in prospective validation for hospitalization (expected-to-observed ratio (E/O): 1.01, AUC: 0.76); for critical illness (E/O 1.03, AUC: 0.79); and for death (E/O: 1.63, AUC=0.93). Among 30 predictors, the top five were age, diastolic blood pressure, blood oxygen saturation, COVID-19 testing status, and respiratory rate. Conclusions CoVA is a prospectively validated automatable score for the outpatient setting to predict adverse events related to COVID-19 infection.

Background and Purpose Reports have suggested that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes neurologic manifestations including encephalopathy and seizures. However, there has been relatively limited electrophysiology data to contextualize these specific concerns and to understand their associated clinical factors. Our objective was to identify EEG abnormalities present in patients with SARS-CoV-2, and to determine whether they reflect new or preexisting brain pathology. Methods We studied a consecutive series of hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2 who received an EEG, obtained using tailored safety protocols. Data from EEG reports and clinical records were analyzed to identify EEG abnormalities and possible clinical associations, including neurologic symptoms, new or preexisting brain pathology, and sedation practices. Results We identified 37 patients with SARS-CoV-2 who underwent EEG, of whom 14 had epileptiform findings (38%). Patients with epileptiform findings were more likely to have preexisting brain pathology (6/14, 43%) than patients without epileptiform findings (2/23, 9%; p=0.042). There were no clear differences in rates of acute brain pathology. One case of nonconvulsive status epilepticus was captured, but was not clearly a direct consequence of SARS-CoV-2. Abnormalities of background rhythms were common, and patients recently sedated were more likely to lack a posterior dominant rhythm (p=0.022). Conclusions Epileptiform abnormalities were common in patients with SARS-CoV-2 referred for EEG, but particularly in the context of preexisting brain pathology and sedation. These findings suggest that neurologic manifestations during SARS-CoV-2 infection may not solely relate to the infection itself, but rather may also reflect patients' broader, preexisting neurologic vulnerabilities.

Background. We sought to develop an automatable score to predict hospitalization, critical illness, or death in patients at risk for COVID-19 presenting for urgent care during the Massachusetts outbreak. Methods. Single-center study of adult outpatients seen in respiratory illness clinics (RICs) or the emergency department (ED), including development (n = 9381, March 7-May 2) and prospective (n = 2205, May 3-14) cohorts. Data was queried from Partners Enterprise Data Warehouse. Outcomes were hospitalization, critical illness or death within 7 days. We developed the COVID-19 Acuity Score (CoVA) using automatically extracted data from the electronic medical record and learning-to-rank ordinal logistic regression modeling. Calibration was assessed using predicted-to-observed event ratio (E/O). Discrimination was assessed by C-statistics (AUC). Results. In the development cohort, 27.3%, 7.2%, and 1.1% of patients experienced hospitalization, critical illness, or death, respectively; and in the prospective cohort, 26.1%, 6.3%, and 0.5%. CoVA showed excellent performance in the development cohort (concurrent validation) for hospitalization (E/O: 1.00, AUC: 0.80); for critical illness (E/O: 1.00, AUC: 0.82); and for death (E/O: 1.00, AUC: 0.87). Performance in the prospective cohort (prospective validation) was similar for hospitalization (E/O: 1.01, AUC: 0.76); for critical illness (E/O 1.03, AUC: 0.79); and for death (E/O: 1.63, AUC=0.93). Among 30 predictors, the top five were age, diastolic blood pressure, blood oxygen saturation, COVID-19 testing status, and respiratory rate. Conclusions. CoVA is a prospectively validated automatable score to assessing risk for adverse outcomes related to COVID-19 infection in the outpatient setting.

OBJECTIVES: Delirium is a common and frequently underdiagnosed complication in acutely hospitalized patients, and its severity is associated with worse clinical outcomes. We propose a physiologically based method to quantify delirium severity as a tool that can help close this diagnostic gap: the Electroencephalographic Confusion Assessment Method Severity Score (E-CAM-S).DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Single-center tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS:Three-hundred seventy-three adult patients undergoing electroencephalography to evaluate altered mental status between August 2015 and December 2019. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:We developed the E-CAM-S based on a learning-to-rank machine learning model of forehead electroencephalography signals. Clinical delirium severity was assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method Severity (CAM-S). We compared associations of E-CAM-S and CAM-S with hospital length of stay and inhospital mortality. E-CAM-S correlated with clinical CAM-S (R = 0.67; p < 0.0001). For the overall cohort, E-CAM-S and CAM-S were similar in their strength of association with hospital length of stay (correlation = 0.31 vs 0.41, respectively; p = 0.082) and inhospital mortality (area under the curve = 0.77 vs 0.81; p = 0.310). Even when restricted to noncomatose patients, E-CAM-S remained statistically similar to CAM-S in its association with length of stay (correlation = 0.37 vs 0.42, respectively; p = 0.188) and inhospital mortality (area under the curve = 0.83 vs 0.74; p = 0.112). In addition to previously appreciated spectral features, the machine learning framework identified variability in multiple measures over time as important features in electroencephalography-based prediction of delirium severity. CONCLUSIONS:The E-CAM-S is an automated, physiologic measure of delirium severity that predicts clinical outcomes with a level of performance comparable to conventional interview-based clinical assessment.