MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098334318 · doi:10.1097/aln.0b013e31825add60

Obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome

2012· review· en· W2098334318 on OpenAlexaff
Edmond H. Chau, David K. Lam, Jean Wong, Babak Mokhlesi, Frances Chung, David S. Warner

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObesity hypoventilation syndromeHypoventilationPositive airway pressureObstructive sleep apneaAnesthesiologyObesityIntensive care medicineSleep apneaContinuous positive airway pressurePopulationAnesthesiaPediatricsInternal medicineRespiratory system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS) is defined by the triad of obesity, daytime hypoventilation, and sleep-disordered breathing without an alternative neuromuscular, mechanical, or metabolic cause of hypoventilation. It is a disease entity distinct from simple obesity and obstructive sleep apnea. OHS is often undiagnosed but its prevalence is estimated to be 10-20% in obese patients with obstructive sleep apnea and 0.15-0.3% in the general adult population. Compared with eucapnic obese patients, those with OHS present with severe upper airway obstruction, restrictive chest physiology, blunted central respiratory drive, pulmonary hypertension, and increased mortality. The mainstay of therapy is noninvasive positive airway pressure. Currently, information regarding OHS is extremely limited in the anesthesiology literature. This review will examine the epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical characteristics, screening, and treatment of OHS. Perioperative management of OHS will be discussed last.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations170
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207