Obstructive sleep apnoea and frequency of occupational injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We sought to determine whether patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) are at increased risk of occupational injury (OI). Patients referred to the University of British Columbia Hospital Sleep Laboratory for suspected OSA (May 2003 to July 2011 were recruited and rates and types of validated OI (that caused at least 1 day of disability) in the 5 years prior to polysomnography were calculated. In a sample of 1236, patients with OSA were twice as likely (OR=1.93, 95% CI 1.06 to 3.50, p=0.03) to suffer at least one OI compared with patients without OSA. This association was attenuated (OR=1.76, CI 0.86 to 3.59, p=0.12) after controlling for confounders. In a secondary analysis, patients with OSA were almost three times more likely (OR=2.88, CI 1.02 to 8.08, p=0.05) to suffer from an injury more likely related to reduced vigilance (eg, a fall or commercial motor vehicle crash) when compared with patients without OSA, and this again was attenuated after controlling for confounders (OR=2.42, CI 0.085 to 6.93, p=0.10).
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".