Metrics of sleep apnea severity: beyond the apnea-hypopnea index
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".