Executive Summary of Respiratory Indications for Polysomnography in Children: An Evidence-Based Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This comprehensive, evidence-based review provides a systematic analysis of the literature regarding the validity, reliability, and clinical utility of polysomnography for characterizing breathing during sleep in children. Findings serve as the foundation of practice parameters regarding respiratory indications for polysomnography in children. METHODS: A task force of content experts performed a systematic review of the relevant literature and graded the evidence using a standardized grading system. Two hundred forty-three evidentiary papers were reviewed, summarized, and graded. The analysis addressed the operating characteristics of polysomnography as a diagnostic procedure in children and identified strengths and limitations of polysomnography for evaluation of respiratory function during sleep. RESULTS: The analysis documents strong face validity and content validity, moderately strong convergent validity when comparing respiratory findings with a variety of relevant independent measures, moderate-to-strong test-retest validity, and limited data supporting discriminant validity for characterizing breathing during sleep in children. The analysis documents moderate-to-strong test-retest reliability and interscorer reliability based on limited data. The data indicate particularly strong clinical utility in children with suspected sleep related breathing disorders and obesity, evolving metabolic syndrome, neurological, neurodevelopmental, or genetic disorders, and children with craniofacial syndromes. Specific consideration was given to clinical utility of polysomnography prior to adenotonsillectomy (AT) for confirmation of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. The most relevant findings include: (1) recognition that clinical history and examination are often poor predictors of respiratory polygraphic findings, (2) preoperative polysomnography is helpful in predicting risk for perioperative complications, and (3) preoperative polysomnography is often helpful in predicting persistence of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome in patients after AT. No prospective studies were identified that address whether clinical outcome following AT for treatment of obstructive sleep apnea is improved in association with routine performance of polysomnography before surgery in otherwise healthy children. A small group of papers confirm the clinical utility of polysomnography for initiation and titration of positive airway pressure support. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric polysomnography shows validity, reliability, and clinical utility that is commensurate with most other routinely employed diagnostic clinical tools or procedures. Findings indicate that the "gold standard" for diagnosis of sleep related breathing disorders in children is not polysomnography alone, but rather the skillful integration of clinical and polygraphic findings by a knowledgeable sleep specialist. Future developments will provide more sophisticated methods for data collection and analysis, but integration of polysomnographic findings with the clinical evaluation will represent the fundamental diagnostic challenge for the sleep specialist.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".