Respiratory Dysfunction and Sleep-Disordered Breathing in Children With Myasthenia Gravis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate sleep patterns and the presence of sleep-disordered breathing in children with myasthenia gravis. We further aimed to examine the relationship between sleep and daytime respiratory function using spirometry tests including upright and supine forced vital capacity, sniff nasal inspiratory pressure, and maximal inspiratory pressure. METHODS: Eleven children between 3 and 18 years old with confirmed myasthenia gravis were recruited from The Hospital for Sick Children Neuromuscular Clinic in this prospective observational study. After informed consent was obtained, patients underwent a comprehensive clinical assessment with collection of anthropometric data. Following this, all subjects performed pulmonary function tests, overnight polysomnography and completed the Epworth Sleepiness Scale questionnaire. RESULTS: Two of eleven children who reported no symptoms of sleep disordered breathing were diagnosed with mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea. Pulmonary function tests showed abnormal maximal inspiratory pressure in 6 of 11 patients, whereas seated forced vital capacity as well as seated to supine forced vital capacity ratios were normal in the entire group. CONCLUSIONS: In our small group of pediatric myasthenia gravis subjects, there was an unexpected finding of obstructive sleep apnea in 2 of the 11 patients studied. Maximal inspiratory pressure appears to be a more sensitive method of detecting abnormalities compared to upright or seated forced vital capacity. A larger multicenter study is needed to validate our findings and to determine the impact of obstructive sleep apnea in the pediatric myasthenia gravis population as well as risk factors associated with sleep disordered breathing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".