MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253065910 · doi:10.21203/rs.2.9298/v2

The Prevalence of Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review

2019· review· en· W4253065910 on OpenAlexafffund
Talha Mubashir, Lusine Abrahamyan, Ayan Niazi, Deween Piyasena, Abdul A. Arif, Jean Wong, Ricardo S. Osorio, Clodagh M. Ryan, Frances Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network FoundationUniversity Health Network
KeywordsObstructive sleep apneaMedicineMEDLINESystematic reviewDementiaPolysomnographyMeta-analysisCognitive impairmentPhysical therapyInternal medicinePediatricsCognitionPsychiatryApneaDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Previous studies have shown that obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with a higher risk of cognitive impairment or dementia in the elderly, leading to deleterious health effects and decreasing quality of life. This systematic review aims to determine the prevalence of OSA in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and examine whether an association between OSA and MCI exists. Methods: We searched Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsychINFO, Scopus, the Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for published and unpublished studies. We included studies in adults with a diagnosis of MCI that reported on the prevalence of OSA. Two independent reviewers performed the abstract and full-text screening, data extraction and the study quality critical appraisal. Results: Five studies were included in the systematic review. Overall, OSA prevalence rates in patients with MCI varied between 11−71% and were influenced by OSA diagnostic methods and patient recruitment locations (community or clinic based). Among studies using the following OSA diagnostic measures– self-report, ApneaLink, Berlin Questionnaire and polysomnography– the OSA prevalence rates in MCI were 11%, 27%, 59% and 70%, respectively. In a community-based sample, the prevalence of OSA in patients with and without MCI was 27% and 26%, respectively. Conclusions: Based on limited evidence, the prevalence of OSA in patients with MCI is 27% and varies based upon OSA diagnostic methods and patient recruitment locations. Our findings provide an important framework for future studies to prospectively investigate the association between OSA and MCI among larger community-based cohorts and implement a standardized approach to diagnose OSA in memory clinics. PROSPERO registration: CRD42018096577

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewlow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.090
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.353 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207