MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800167499 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsy061.1072

1073 What Happens To Patients After A Diagnosis Of Sleep Apnea?

2018· article· en· W2800167499 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sally Bailes, Dorrie Rizzo, D Tran, Laura Creti, Roland Grad, Marc Baltzan, Alan Pavilanis, Catherine S. Fichten, Eva Libman

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai HospitalSt Mary's Hospital CentreJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePolysomnographyObstructive sleep apneaSleep apneaChecklistSleep medicineSleep disorderSleep studySleep (system call)PediatricsApneaPhysical therapyInsomniaInternal medicinePsychiatryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) common in older family medicine patients, yet hard to identify and even more challenging to treat. Little has been described about what happens to patients after a diagnosis is made and treatment is recommended. What determines which patients will adopt and persist with treatment? Consecutive older family medicine patients (n=35, M, age = 58) underwent in-laboratory polysomnography (PSG) and completed sleep-related questionnaires. Those receiving a diagnosis of OSA were followed for treatment according to usual medical practice. After two years, we enquired about what OSA treatment they had declined, initiated, maintained, or had given up. We examined their baseline responses to the Sleep Symptom Checklist (SSC) which assesses severity of sleep-related difficulty in four domains. Thirty-one patients (13 men, 18 women) received a diagnosis of OSA. All were recommended treatment, including CPAP, dental appliance, surgery, nasal sprays, etc. Only 17 patients initiated treatment. Of the 13 who initiated CPAP treatment (2 men, 14 women), 10 (all women) were still using their machines at 2-year follow-up. Fourteen participants with OSA, 8 men and 6 women, refused treatment. Reasons given were: could not afford CPAP machine, did not want to sleep with a machine, did not believe in OSA. Group comparisons show that those who persisted with CPAP treatment showed more severe sleep-related symptoms at baseline than those who refused treatment, including worse daytime functioning (p<.01), sleep disorder symptoms (p<.006), and psychological adjustment (p<.01). There were no significant differences between these two groups in severity of insomnia symptoms or of OSA as measured by the AHI or SpO2. This older family medicine sample was not typical of a sleep clinic population since they were all offered sleep testing regardless of suspected OSA. The most notable results include 1) a high presence of OSA, 2). a high proportion of women volunteering for testing, and 3) that having more severe daytime, sleep disorder, and psychological symptoms may be an important motivation for adopting and persisting with CPAP therapy. Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207