Influence of Lung Function and Sleep-disordered Breathing on All-Cause Mortality. A Community-based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rationale Whether sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) severity and diminished lung function act synergistically to heighten the risk of adverse health outcomes remains a topic of significant debate. Objectives The current study sought to determine whether the association between lower lung function and mortality would be stronger in those with increasing severity of SDB in a community-based cohort of middle-aged and older adults. Methods Full montage home sleep testing and spirometry data were analyzed on 6,173 participants of the Sleep Heart Health Study. Proportional hazards models were used to calculate risk for all-cause mortality, with FEV1 and apnea–hypopnea index (AHI) as the primary exposure indicators along with several potential confounders. Measurements and Main Results All-cause mortality rate was 26.9 per 1,000 person-years in those with SDB (AHI ≥5 events/h) and 18.2 per 1,000 person-years in those without (AHI <5 events/h). For every 200-ml decrease in FEV1, all-cause mortality increased by 11.0% in those without SDB (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.08–1.13). In contrast, for every 200-ml decrease in FEV1, all-cause mortality increased by only 6.0% in participants with SDB (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.04–1.09). Additionally, the incremental influence of lung function on all-cause mortality was less with increasing severity of SDB (P value for interaction between AHI and FEV1, 0.004). Conclusions Lung function was associated with risk for all-cause mortality. The incremental contribution of lung function to mortality diminishes with increasing severity of SDB.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".