Predicting Polysomnography Parameters from Anthropometric Features and Breathing Sounds Recorded during Wakefulness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The apnea/hypopnea index (AHI) is the primary outcome of a polysomnography assessment (PSG) for determining obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) severity. However, other OSA severity parameters (i.e., total arousal index, mean oxygen saturation (SpO2%), etc.) are crucial for a full diagnosis of OSA and deciding on a treatment option. PSG assessments and home sleep tests measure these parameters, but there is no screening tool to estimate or predict the OSA severity parameters other than the AHI. In this study, we investigated whether a combination of breathing sounds recorded during wakefulness and anthropometric features could be predictive of PSG parameters. METHODS: Anthropometric information and five tracheal breathing sound cycles were recorded during wakefulness from 145 individuals referred to an overnight PSG study. The dataset was divided into training, validation, and blind testing datasets. Spectral and bispectral features of the sounds were evaluated to run correlation and classification analyses with the PSG parameters collected from the PSG sleep reports. RESULTS: Many sound and anthropometric features had significant correlations (up to 0.56) with PSG parameters. Using combinations of sound and anthropometric features in a bilinear model for each PSG parameter resulted in correlation coefficients up to 0.84. Using the evaluated models for classification with a two-class random-forest classifier resulted in a blind testing classification accuracy up to 88.8% for predicting the key PSG parameters such as arousal index. CONCLUSIONS: These results add new value to the current OSA screening tools and provide a new promising possibility for predicting PSG parameters using only a few seconds of breathing sounds recorded during wakefulness without conducting an overnight PSG study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".