MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135259744 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsab030

Metrics of sleep apnea severity: beyond the apnea-hypopnea index

2021· review· en· W3135259744 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on AgingNational Health and Medical Research CouncilNational Institute for Occupational Safety and HealthVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteBritish Columbia Lung AssociationCenters for Disease Control and PreventionFisher and Paykel HealthcareNational Institutes of HealthResMedMedical Research CouncilAmerican Heart AssociationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsObstructive sleep apneaMedicineApnea–hypopnea indexNeurocognitiveIntensive care medicineSleep apneaArousalPolysomnographyHypopneaApneaPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryCognitionPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is thought to affect almost 1 billion people worldwide. OSA has well established cardiovascular and neurocognitive sequelae, although the optimal metric to assess its severity and/or potential response to therapy remains unclear. The apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) is well established; thus, we review its history and predictive value in various different clinical contexts. Although the AHI is often criticized for its limitations, it remains the best studied metric of OSA severity, albeit imperfect. We further review the potential value of alternative metrics including hypoxic burden, arousal intensity, odds ratio product, and cardiopulmonary coupling. We conclude with possible future directions to capture clinically meaningful OSA endophenotypes including the use of genetics, blood biomarkers, machine/deep learning and wearable technologies. Further research in OSA should be directed towards providing diagnostic and prognostic information to make the OSA diagnosis more accessible and to improving prognostic information regarding OSA consequences, in order to guide patient care and to help in the design of future clinical trials.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.302 · 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