MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073868316 · doi:10.1097/aln.0b013e3181914b19

STOP Questionnaire Warrants CAUTION Sign

2008· article· en· W2073868316 on OpenAlexaffabout
Frances Chung, Pu Liao

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSign (mathematics)Intensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the letter to the editor titled “STOP Questionnaire Warrants CAUTION Sign,” Dr. Overdyk and colleagues raised some interesting issues regarding the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and our papers.With the variation between different sleep centers, and even different nights for the same patient at the same sleep center,1,2there have been different opinions regarding the definition and interpretation of the AHI. Considering the feasibility and cost, we chose the result of one night of in-laboratory polysomnography as the gold standard to validate the STOP questionnaire. When we started our study in early 2006, there were no widely accepted mandatory agreements on the definition of the different measurements in polysomnography. The majority of sleep laboratories followed the recommendations of the Academy of Sleep Medicine Task Force, published in 1997.3The Academy of Sleep Medicine has since published a new manual for the scoring of sleep and associated events in 2007.4The new manual is mandatory to be followed in United States after July 1, 2008.*Comparing the criteria that we used with the 2007 manual, there is no difference regarding the definition of apnea. However, there are some changes in the definition of hypopnea. In the criteria we used, an episode of hypopnea was defined as a reduction of nasal air flow ≥ 50% with a drop in pulse oxygen saturation ≥ 3% which last more than 10 s. In the 2007 manual, either a drop of pulse oxygen saturation ≥ 4% with a decrease of nasal air flow ≥ 30% or a drop of pulse oxygen saturation ≥ 3% with a decrease of nasal air flow ≥50% which last ≥ 10 s will be defined as 1 episode of hypopnea. The definition in the 2007 manual for hypopnea is broader than the definition we used for our study.In our 177 study patients for validating the STOP questionnaire, the severity classification based on the AHI and number of patients in each group can be found on page 817;5AHI ≤ 5:55, AHI > 5 and ≤ 15:52, AHI > 15 and ≤ 30:31, and AHI > 30:39. When doing the analysis of predictive parameters, we had to classify patients into either smaller or bigger than the cutoff value and use this classification to evaluate the screening tools. That is the reason why we combined patients with moderate and severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in one group to evaluate the capacity of screening tools to identify this group of patients.We agree with Dr. Overdyk and colleagues that the duration of oxygen desaturation, apnea and hypopnea, rate of desaturation, adequacy of ventilation recovery, and level and stability of the arousal threshold are very important factors in evaluating the severity of OSA, especially for assessing the potential to trigger other perioperative adverse events. However, there is no agreement yet on how to incorporate these factors into the severity classification of OSA patients.Our main focus was to develop and validate a concise and easy-to-use screening tool for preoperative clinics. We agree with Dr. Overdyk and colleagues that the STOP questionnaire is a practical step forward in identifying patients with OSA, and it bears the same limitations as other questionnaires. To more accurately stratify the perioperative risk, guide postoperative monitoring, and predict outcome, we need to combine the score of the STOP questionnaire with the other information such as the need for narcotics and the invasiveness of the surgery. These points were illustrated in the American Society of Anesthesiologists guideline on the perioperative management of OSA patients.6†University of Toronto, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Frances.Chung@uhn.on.ca

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0150.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0990.083

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 head0.298
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207