Seasonal variability of at-home pulse oximetry in children with obstructive sleep apnea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indroduction : nocturnal pulse oximetry has a high positive predictive value for polysomnographically-diagnosed obstructive sleep apnea(OSA) and is increasingly used as first screening test. Objectives : the aim of this study was to evaluate the intersubjects seasonal variability of at-home pulse oximetry in children. Methods : at-home nocturnal pulse oximetry recording was consecutively performed on children referred for suspected OSA from February 2009 and October 2011. Patients with significant comorbidities were excluded. For each exam the McGill Oximetry Score(MOS) was also categorized. Results : 270 children(169 males), aged 4.5 yrs ± 2.5(mean ±SD), were included. A significant difference was found between winter(Wi) vs spring(Sp), and winter vs summer(Su) for percentage of total effective recording time spent(TERT) with SpO 2 <90%(respectively, p<0.01 and p<0.01); for lowest SpO 2 [Wi vs Sp p<0.01, Wi vs Su p=0.03 and Wi vs Autumn (Au) p=0.04]. Moreover, mean pulse rate(PR) showed seasonal difference especially comparing Wi and Sp(p<0.01) and similarly, highest PR between Wi vs Sp(p<0.01) and Wi vs Su(p<0.01). Interestingly, PR variability(PRV) showed significant seasonal difference comparing Wi vs all other seasons (Sp_p<0.01, Su_p<0.01, Au_p=0.01). Similar difference between seasons was found for the oxygen desaturation index (n° of desaturation ≥4%/TERT) (Wi vs Sp_p<0.01, Wi vs Su_p<0.01, Wi vs Au_p<0.01). Conclusions : Our data suggest the presence of seasonal differences in pulse oximetry study with winter identified as the most critical period. Seasonal differences need to be taken into account when nocturnal pulse oximetry is used to guide clinical decisions in children with suspected 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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".