The psychological burden of OSAS patients is not correlated with apnea-hypopnea index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is characterized by repeated episodes of upper airway obstruction during sleep, which leads to the presence of excessive daytime sleepiness. Regarding the psychological comorbidity in patients diagnosed with OSAS, previous studies focused mainly on depressive and, secondarily, to anxiety symptoms. Aims and Objectives: To record the prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms and of alexithymic characteristics in a sample of OSAS patients and to investigate their relation to respiratory parameter (Apnea - Hypopnea Index, AHI) of polysomnography. Methods: The study was conducted in a certified sleep laboratory. 35 randomly selected patients were examined for anxiety, depression and alexithymia using the Spielberger Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) and the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), respectively. Results: A high prevalence of anxiety (41.4%) and depressive symptoms (55.2%) and of alexithymic characteristics (41.4%) was observed in OSAS patients. Although the control group showed a higher prevalence of anxiety (66.7%) and depressive (83.3%) symptoms, there were no differences between the two groups (t-test p> 0.05). With regard to severity, no differences were observed between subgroups (mild, moderate and severe OSAS, ANOVA p> 0.05). Women showed higher scores in BDI and STAI compared to men (t-test p 0.05). Conclusions: This study supports the presence of a high degree of psychological burden on patients diagnosed with OSAS, regardless of the severity, as determined by the AHI.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".