Obstructive sleep disordered breathing in 2- to 18-year-old children: diagnosis and management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This document summarises the conclusions of a European Respiratory Society Task Force on the diagnosis and management of obstructive sleep disordered breathing (SDB) in childhood and refers to children aged 2-18 years. Prospective cohort studies describing the natural history of SDB or randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials regarding its management are scarce. Selected evidence (362 articles) can be consolidated into seven management steps. SDB is suspected when symptoms or abnormalities related to upper airway obstruction are present (step 1). Central nervous or cardiovascular system morbidity, growth failure or enuresis and predictors of SDB persistence in the long-term are recognised (steps 2 and 3), and SDB severity is determined objectively preferably using polysomnography (step 4). Children with an apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) >5 episodes·h(-1), those with an AHI of 1-5 episodes·h(-1) and the presence of morbidity or factors predicting SDB persistence, and children with complex conditions (e.g. Down syndrome and Prader-Willi syndrome) all appear to benefit from treatment (step 5). Treatment interventions are usually implemented in a stepwise fashion addressing all abnormalities that predispose to SDB (step 6) with re-evaluation after each intervention to detect residual disease and to determine the need for additional treatment (step 7).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".