The relationship between eating psychopathology and obstructive sleep apnea in bariatric surgery candidates: A retrospective study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), eating psychopathology, and major depressive disorder (MDD) are highly prevalent in patients with severe obesity. Our study aimed to identify differences in binge-eating disorder (BED) prevalence in bariatric surgery candidates with and without OSA. METHODS: In this retrospective study, demographic data, psychiatric diagnoses, OSA diagnosis, binge eating, depressive and quality of life (QOL) symptoms were collected from 1,099 bariatric surgery candidates from a Canadian setting. Analysis of variance was used to identify differences in psychopathology and QOL between groups with OSA and BED, BED alone, OSA alone or neither BED or OSA. RESULTS: = 5.165, p = .023). Binge-eating (p < .001) and depressive symptoms (p < .001) were significantly higher in patients with co-morbid BED and OSA compared to patients with OSA alone or patients with no diagnosis of BED or OSA. Patients with co-morbid BED and OSA only had significantly lower physical (p < .001) and mental QOL (p = .007) compared to patients with no diagnosis of BED or OSA. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that patients with a history of BED should be reassessed for OSA. Research is needed to examine whether BED may predispose individuals to developing obesity and 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".