MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Overnight oximetry as a screening tool for moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnoea in South African children

2018· article· en· W2906821254 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSouth African Medical Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInterquartile rangeGold standard (test)PolysomnographyPediatricsMedical recordInternal medicineApnea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is common in children yet often overlooked, as symptom-based screening is unreliable. Polysomnography is regarded as the gold standard for the diagnosis of OSA, but is not widely available in South Africa (SA). Overnight oximetry is a validated screening tool for OSA. OBJECTIVES: To describe the impact and utility of overnight oximetry at a tertiary children's hospital in SA. METHODS: A retrospective descriptive study was conducted of patients screened for OSA by overnight oximetry at a paediatric referral hospital from December 2012 to December 2014. Clinical data were retrieved from the oximetry database and medical records. Recordings of ≥6 hours were considered adequate and included in the study. OSA severity was determined using the McGill score. Details on management and outcome were documented. RESULTS: Oximetry studies in 137 of 153 patients were suitable for analysis (88 males (64.2%), median age 31.4 months (interquartile range (IQR) 15.8 - 65.8). Adenotonsillar hypertrophy was common (n=97, 70.8%), and 65 children (47.4%) had two or more underlying OSA risk factors. McGill's score classified patients as follows: no/mild OSA n=55 (40.1%), moderate OSA n=23 (16.8%), severe OSA n=23 (16.8%) and very severe OSA n=36 (26.3%). Male gender, adenotonsillar hypertrophy and a lower weight-for-age z-score (-1.3 v. -0.7; p=0.038) were associated with severe to very severe OSA. Seventy-eight children (56.9%) were referred for surgery, 33 (24.1%) receiving urgent surgery within a median of 6 days (IQR 4 - 12). In contrast, 59 children (43.1%) with suspected OSA did not require surgical intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Overnight oximetry is a simple low-cost tool to assess severity of OSA and prioritise appropriate OSA management in resource-constrained settings such as SA.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.276 · 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