The role of artificial intelligence in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The first-line and most common treatment for obstructive sleep apnea is nasal continuous positive airway pressure, which serves as a pneumatic splint to stabilize the upper airway and is effective when used with appropriate adherence. Continuous positive airway pressure compliance rates remain significantly low despite machine improvements and compliance intervention. Other treatment options include oral appliances, myofunctional therapy, and surgery. The aim of this project is to elucidate the role of artificial intelligence within improving the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea. METHODS: Related publications between 1999 and 2022 were reviewed from PubMed and Embase databases utilizing search terms "artificial intelligence," "machine learning," "obstructive sleep apnea," and "treatment." Both authors independently screened the results by title/abstract then by full text review. 126 non-duplicate articles were screened, 38 articles were included after title and abstract screen and 30 articles were included after full text review. The inclusion criteria are outline in the PICO framework and involved studies focused on artificial intelligence application in guiding and evaluating obstructive sleep apnea treatment. Non-English articles were excluded. RESULTS: The role of artificial intelligence in the treatment of OSA was categorized into the following sections: Predicting treatment outcomes of various treatment options, Improving/Evaluating treatment, and Personalizing treatment with improving understanding of underlying mechanisms of OSA. CONCLUSIONS: Artificial intelligence has the capacity to improve the treatment of OSA through predicting outcomes of treatment options, evaluating the treatment the patient is currently utilizing and increasing understanding of the mechanisms that contribute to OSA disease process and physiology. Implementing AI in guiding treatment decisions allows patients to connect with treatment methods that would be most effective on an individual basis.
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".