MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002548008 · doi:10.1542/peds.105.2.405

Nocturnal Pulse Oximetry as an Abbreviated Testing Modality for Pediatric Obstructive Sleep Apnea

2000· article· en· W2002548008 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulse oximetryPolysomnographyObstructive sleep apneaNocturnalApneaLikelihood ratios in diagnostic testingSleep apneaInternal medicineDiagnostic accuracyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the utility of pulse oximetry for diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in children. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of 349 patients referred to a pediatric sleep laboratory for possible OSA. A mixed/obstructive apnea/hypopnea index (MOAHI) greater than or equal to 1 on nocturnal polysomnography (PSG) defined OSA. A sleep laboratory physician read nocturnal oximetry trend and event graphs, blinded to clinical and polysomnographic results. Likelihood ratios were used to determine the change in probability of having OSA before and after oximetry results were known. RESULTS: Of 349 patients, 210 (60%) had OSA as defined polysomnographically. Oximetry trend graphs were classified as positive for OSA in 93 and negative or inconclusive in 256 patients. Of the 93 oximetry results read as positive, PSG confirmed OSA in 90 patients. A positive oximetry trend graph had a likelihood ratio of 19.4, increasing the probability of having OSA from 60% to 97%. The median MOAHI of children with a positive oximetry result was 16.4 (7.5, 30.2). The 3 false-positive oximetry results were all in the subgroup of 92 children who had diagnoses other than adenotonsillar hypertrophy that might have affected breathing during sleep. A negative or inconclusive oximetry result had a likelihood ratio of.58, decreasing the probability of having OSA from 60% to 47%. Interobserver reliability for oximetry readings was very good to excellent (kappa =.80). CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of a child suspected of having OSA, a positive nocturnal oximetry trend graph has at least a 97% positive predictive value. Oximetry could: 1) be the definitive diagnostic test for straightforward OSA attributable to adenotonsillar hypertrophy in children older than 12 months of age, or 2) quickly and inexpensively identify children with a history suggesting sleep-disordered breathing who would require PSG to elucidate the type and severity. A negative oximetry result cannot be used to rule out OSA.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it