MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042317981 · doi:10.2147/nss.s258276

<p>The Evaluation of Autonomic Arousals in Scoring Sleep Respiratory Disturbances with Polysomnography and Portable Monitor Devices: A Proof of Concept Study</p>

2020· article· en· W3042317981 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNature and Science of Sleep · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalHôtel-Dieu de MontréalMcGill UniversityCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePolysomnographySleep (system call)Sleep medicineSleep apnea syndromesCardiologyAnesthesiaInsomniaApneaSleep disorderPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Autonomic arousals can be considered as surrogates of electroencephalography (EEG) arousals when calculating respiratory disturbance index (RDI). The main objective of this proof of concept study was to evaluate the use of heart rate acceleration (HRa) arousals associated with sleep respiratory events in a population undergoing full polysomnography (type 1) and in another undergoing portable monitor study (type 3). Our hypothesis is that when compared to other commonly used indexes, RDI based on HRa will capture more events in both types of recording. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed in two different populations of patients with suspected OSA: a) 72 patients undergoing one night of type 1 recording and b) 79 patients undergoing one night of type 3 recording. Variables for type 1 were 4% oxygen desaturation index (ODI), apnea/hypopnea index (AHI), RDI based on EEG arousals (RDIe), and RDI based on HRa with threshold of 5bpm (RDIa5). For type 3, variables were 4% ODI, AHI, and RDIa5 (it is not possible to calculate RDIe due to the absence of EEG). Calculated data were 1) Mean values for each sleep disturbance index in type 1 and 3 recordings; 2) Frequency of migration from lower to higher OSA severity categories using RDIa5 in comparison to AHI (thresholds: ≥5/h mild, ≥15/h moderate, ≥30/h severe); and 3) Bland-Altman plots to assess agreement between AHI vs RDIe and RDIa5 in type 1 population, and AHI vs RDIa5 in type 3 populations. RESULTS: More respiratory disturbance events were captured with RDIa5 index in both type 1 and type 3 recordings when compared to the other indexes. In type 1 recording, when using RDIa5 37% of patients classified as not having OSA with AHI were now identified as having OSA, and a total of 59% migrated to higher severity categories. In type 3 recording, similar results were obtained, as 37% of patients classified as not having OSA with AHI were now identified as having OSA using RDIa5, and a total of 55% patients migrated to higher severity categories. Mean differences for RDIa5 and AHI in type 1 and 3 populations were similar. CONCLUSION: The use of autonomic arousals such as HRa can help to detect more respiratory disturbance events when compared to other indexes, being a variable that may help to capture borderline mild cases. This becomes especially relevant in type 3 recordings. Future research is needed to determine its validity, optimization, and its clinical significance.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score0.339

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.265 · 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