Measures of nocturnal oxyhemoglobin desaturation in children with neuromuscular disease or Prader‐Willi syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objectives Evidence for nocturnal oximetry interpretation in patients with abnormal neuromuscular function is limited. We aimed to compare children with neuromuscular disease (NMD) or Prader‐Willi syndrome (PWS) to otherwise healthy subjects with obstructive sleep‐disordered breathing (SDB) or without respiratory disorder (controls) regarding nocturnal oximetry parameters. Methods We analyzed recordings from children with: (a) NMD; (b) PWS; (c) snoring and adenotonsillar hypertrophy and/or obesity (SDB); and (d) controls. Outcomes included: (a) basal SpO2; (b) proportions of subjects with McGill oximetry score (MOS) >1 (clusters of desaturations); and (c) desaturation index (SpO2 drops ≥3%/h‐ODI3). Results Data of 12 subjects with NMD (median age, 5.2 years; IQR, 2.7, 8.2), 14 children with PWS (5 years; 2.3, 6.9), 21 children with SDB (5.8 years; 4.6, 9.6), and 20 controls (6.2 years; 5.4, 11.2) were analyzed. Children with NMD, PWS, and SDB had lower basal SpO2 than controls (95.6% [94.5%, 96.9%], 96.2% [95.1%, 97.4%], 96.1% [95.8%, 97.5%] vs 97.8% [97.2%, 97.9%], respectively; (P < .01). NMD and PWS showed the greatest negative effect on basal SpO2 (P < .05). Children with SDB or PWS had a higher risk of MOS >1 than patients with NMD (OR, 25.9 [95% CI, 3.4‐200.4] and 9.5 [1.5‐62.6]). NMD, PWS, and SDB were similar regarding ODI3, which was elevated compared to ODI3 in controls (P < .05). Frequent desaturations predominated in NMD, while periods of sustained desaturation were noted in NMD and PWS. Conclusion PWS and NMD have a negative effect on basal SpO2, while clusters of desaturations are prevalent in patients with PWS or obstructive SDB.
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) | 0.000 | 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".