MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3111181233 · doi:10.1002/alz.038046

Obstructive sleep apnea in older adults: Differential cognitive impairment moderated by sex?

2020· article· en· W3111181233 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julie Legault, Cynthia Thompson, Marie‐Ève Martineau‐Dussault, Julie Carrier, Thien Thanh Dang‐Vu, Dominique Lorrain, Nadia Gosselin

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsHealth and Social Services Centre University Institute of Geriatrics of SherbrookeCégep de SherbrookeUniversité de SherbrookeInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalCanadian Sleep & Circadian NetworkConcordia UniversityUniversité de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCognitionObstructive sleep apneaNeuropsychologyStroop effectCognitive declineBody mass indexAudiologyEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceRisk factorEpisodic memoryInternal medicinePediatricsDiseaseDementiaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a risk factor for cognitive decline, but the effect of sex on this association is unknown. This study aims at characterizing the relationship between risk of OSA and cognitive function in older men and women. Method We included 152 women (73 ± 6 years) and 89 men (75 ± 6 years) matched for education, age and presence of APOE4 allele. They were part of the Quebec Consortium for Early Identification of Alzheimer’s Disease (CIMA‐Q) and were either cognitively healthy or had subjective cognitive decline or mild cognitive impairment. All participants were tested with a neuropsychological battery measuring cognitive domains typically affected by Alzheimer’s disease. Risk of OSA was determined using a validated questionnaire that considers signs and symptoms associated with OSA such as snoring (S), tiredness (T), observation of apneas (O), high blood pressure (P), high body mass index (B) and larger neck circumference (N), which provides a risk score (STOP‐BN). Multiple linear regressions were performed between STOP‐BN and cognitive scores in men and women separately. Result Higher risk of OSA, identified by a higher score on the STOP‐BN, is correlated with slower information processing speed (Stroop, condition 2) in women (β= 0,896, p = 0,006) and men (β= 0,954, p = 0,043). In men, higher risk of OSA correlated with worse performance in short (Digit symbol, incidental learning score: β = 0,982, p = 0,034) and long‐term memory (Face‐name associations, delayed recall: β = 0,318, p = 0,047). Conclusion Our results suggest that sex has a moderating effect on the association between OSA and cognitive function. An altered information processing speed has already been reported in apneic patients and does not necessarily reflect a risk of dementia. However, altered memory in men at higher risk of OSA needs to be investigated longitudinally to determine whether OSA could represent an early marker of cognitive decline.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research→French-language works237,207→