Diagnosis of Obstructive Sleep Apnea during Wakefulness Using Upper Airway Negative Pressure and Machine Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Rational: Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) is a common disorder, affecting almost 10% of adults, but very underdiagnosed. This is largely due to limited access to overnight sleep testing using polysomnography (PSG). Our goal was to distinguish OSA from healthy individual using a simple maneuver during wakefulness in combination with machine learning methods. Methods: Participants have undergone an overnight PSG to determine their ground truth OSA severity. Separately, they were asked to breathe through a nasal mask or a mouth piece through which negative pressure (NP) was applied, during wakefulness. Airflow waveforms were acquired and several features were extracted and used to train various classifiers to predict OSA. Results and Discussion: The performance of each classifier and experimental setup was calculated. The best results were obtained using Random Forest classifier for distinguishing OSA from healthy individuals with a very good area under the curve of 0.80. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to deploy machine learning and NP with promising path to diagnose OSA during wakefulness.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".