ERS statement on obstructive sleep disordered breathing in 1- to 23-month-old children
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present statement was produced by a European Respiratory Society Task Force to summarise the evidence and current practice on the diagnosis and management of obstructive sleep disordered breathing (SDB) in children aged 1–23 months. A systematic literature search was completed and 159 articles were summarised to answer clinically relevant questions. SDB is suspected when symptoms or abnormalities related to upper airway obstruction are identified. Morbidity (pulmonary hypertension, growth delay, behavioural problems) and coexisting conditions (feeding difficulties, recurrent otitis media) may be present. SDB severity is measured objectively, preferably by polysomnography, or alternatively polygraphy or nocturnal oximetry. Children with apparent upper airway obstruction during wakefulness, those with abnormal sleep study in combination with SDB symptoms ( e.g. snoring) and/or conditions predisposing to SDB ( e.g. mandibular hypoplasia) as well as children with SDB and complex conditions ( e.g. Down syndrome, Prader–Willi syndrome) will benefit from treatment. Adenotonsillectomy and continuous positive airway pressure are the most frequently used treatment measures along with interventions targeting specific conditions ( e.g. supraglottoplasty for laryngomalacia or nasopharyngeal airway for mandibular hypoplasia). Hence, obstructive SDB in children aged 1–23 months is a multifactorial disorder that requires objective assessment and treatment of all underlying abnormalities that contribute to upper airway obstruction during sleep.
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.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it