MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039452491 · doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e318187c83a

A Systemic Review of Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Its Implications for Anesthesiologists

2008· review· en· W2039452491 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

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeObstructive sleep apneaMEDLINESleep apneaIntensive care medicinePopulationAmerican society of anesthesiologistsSystematic reviewSurgeryAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is present in a significant proportion of the population, but the majority of patients remain undiagnosed. It is crucial that anesthesiologists and surgeons recognize the increased perioperative risks associated with undiagnosed OSA. We present a systematic review of the literature on the perioperative management of surgical patients with OSA. METHODS: The scope of this review is restricted to publications in all surgical specialties and in the adult patient population. The main search key words were: “perioperative care,” “sleep apnea,” “obstructive sleep apnea,” “perioperative risk,” and “perioperative care.” The databases Medline, Embase, Biological Abstract, Science Citation Index, and Healthstar were searched for relevant English language articles from 1966 to March 2007. RESULTS: The literature supports an increased perioperative risk in OSA patients. The American Society of Anesthesiologists guidelines support the routine screening for OSA during preoperative assessment, and methods of OSA screening are discussed in this review. This review suggests a number of perioperative management strategies to reduce surgical risk in patients with OSA. However, apart from the consensus-based American Society of Anesthesiologists guidelines, it is important to note that evidence-based recommendations are lacking in the literature. CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests ways to screen for OSA in the preoperative setting and proposes perioperative management strategies. The ultimate goal is to reduce the perioperative risk of OSA patients but, to realize that goal, research will be needed to determine whether screening for OSA and/or adapting specific perioperative management approaches translates into a lessening of adverse events in surgical patients with undiagnosed OSA. IMPLICATIONS: There is a frequent prevalence of undiagnosed obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Surgical patients with OSA are vulnerable to sedation, anesthesia and analgesia. The perioperative risk of OSA patients may be reduced by the appropriate screening to detect undiagnosed OSA and adoption of a specific perioperative management plan for 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.303 · 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