MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920198441 · doi:10.1113/ep087441

Quantitative assessment of nocturnal neural respiratory drive in children with and without obstructive sleep apnoea using surface EMG

2019· article· en· W2920198441 on OpenAlexaff
Sandra Chuang, Arthur Teng, Jane E. Butler, Simon C. Gandevia, Indra Narang, Nancy Briggs, Hiran Selvadurai, Adam Jaffé

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Physiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolysomnographyMedicineInterquartile rangeSleep (system call)Respiratory systemDiaphragm (acoustics)Sleep studyBreathingAnesthesiaCardiologyPhysical therapyInternal medicineApnea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New Findings What is the central question of this study? Recent studies have suggested potential utility of non‐normalized respiratory muscle EMG as an index of neural respiratory drive (NRD). Whether NRD measured using non‐normalized surface EMG of the lateral chest wall overlying the diaphragm (sEMGcw) recorded during nocturnal clinical polysomnography can differentiate children with and without obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is not known. What is the main finding and its importance? Non‐normalized sEMGcw was increased in children with OSA and an additional group of snoring children without OSA but subjectively increased respiratory effort compared with primary snorers. The sEMGcw has potential clinical utility in evaluation of children with sleep‐disordered breathing as an objective, non‐invasive, non‐volitional marker of NRD. Abstract Our aim was to investigate whether neural respiratory drive measured by non‐normalized surface EMG recorded from the chest wall overlying the diaphragm (sEMGcw) differentiates children with and without obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). Polysomnography data of children aged 0–18 years were divided into the following three groups: (i) primary snorers (PS); (ii) snoring children without OSA but with increased work of breathing (incWOB; subjective physician report of increased respiratory effort during sleep); and (iii) children with OSA [obstructive apnoea–hypopnoea index (OAHI) >1 h −1 ]. Excerpts of sEMGcw obtained during tidal unobstructed breathing from light, deep and rapid eye movement sleep were exported for quantitative analysis. Overnight polysomnography data from 45 PS [median age 4.4 years (interquartile range 3.0–7.7 years), OAHI 0 h −1 (0.0–0.2 h −1 )], 19 children with incWOB [age 2.8 years (2.4–5.7 years), OAHI 0.1 h −1 (0.0–0.4 h −1 )] and 27 children with OSA [age 3.6 years (2.6–6.2 years), OAHI 3.7 h −1 (2.3–6.9 h −1 )] were analysed. The sEMGcw was higher in those with OSA [8.47 μV (5.98–13.07 μV); P < 0.0001] and incWOB [8.97 μV (5.94–13.43 μV); P < 0.001] compared with PS [4.633 μV (2.98–6.76 μV)]. There was no significant difference in the sEMGcw between children with incWOB and OSA ( P = 0.78). Log sEMGcw remained greater in children with OSA and incWOB compared with PS after age, body mass index centiles, sleep stages and sleep positions were included in the mixed linear models ( P < 0.0001). The correlation between sEMGcw and OAHI in children without OSA was small ( r s = 0.254, P = 0.04). The sEMGcw is increased in children with OSA and incWOB compared with PS.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.341 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental PhysiologySame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207