MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158354611 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsab072.468

469 Utilization of the STOP-Bang questionnaire for referral of obstructive sleep apnea in various geographical regions

2021· article· en· W3158354611 on OpenAlexaff
Bianca Pivetta, Lina Chen, Mahesh Nagappa, Aparna Saripella, Rida Waseem, Marina Englesakis, Frances Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstructive sleep apneaMEDLINEPolysomnographyCINAHLCochrane LibraryRespiratory disturbance indexPhysical therapySleep apneaSystematic reviewSleep disorderMeta-analysisPediatricsInternal medicineApneaPsychological interventionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a highly prevalent global health concern and is associated with many adverse outcomes for patients. Our objective is to determine the utility of the STOP-Bang questionnaire in the sleep clinic setting to screen for and stratify the risk of OSA among populations from different geographical regions. Methods The following electronic databases were systematically searched from 2008 to March 2020: MEDLINE, Medline-in-process, Embase, EmCare Nursing, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, Journals @ Ovid, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL. Inclusion criteria were: 1) assessment of the STOP-Bang questionnaire to screen for OSA in adult subjects (age ≥18 years); 2) patients referred to sleep clinic; 3) lab-polysomnography or home sleep apnea testing results confirmed the OSA diagnosis; and 4) apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) or respiratory disturbance index (RDI) was used to diagnose and grade the severity of OSA. Clinical and demographic data were extracted from each article independently by two reviewers (B.P., L.C.). Pooled predictive parameters were calculated using 2x2 contingency tables. Random effects meta-analyses and meta-regression with sensitivity analyses were performed. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Results Forty-seven studies (n=26,547) studies met the criteria for systematic review (mean age: 49±14 years, mean body mass index: 32±8 kg/m2, 65% male). Studies were organized into different geographic regional groups – North America, South America, Europe, Middle East, East Asia, and South/Southeast Asia. The prevalence of all OSA, moderate-to-severe OSA, and severe OSA was 80%, 58%, and 39%, respectively. The area under the receiver operating curve of a STOP-Bang score ≥3 to detect moderate-to-severe OSA is high (>0.80) in all regions, except in East Asia (0.52). A STOP-Bang score ≥ 3 has excellent sensitivity (>90%) and high discriminative power to exclude moderate-to-severe, and severe OSA with negative predictive values of 77% and 91%, respectively. Conclusion The meta-regression analysis demonstrates that the STOP-Bang questionnaire can be utilized as an effective OSA screening tool among different geographical populations to assist in prioritizing patients with suspected OSA for assessment in sleep clinic. Support (if any):

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207