Night‐to‐night variability of polygraphy in children with sleep disordered breathing symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Polygraphy (PG) can be used as an alternative test for the diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) in children. Night-to-night variability of PG in children is not known. Our aim was to determine whether a single night PG was reliable for OSAS diagnosis in children with symptoms of sleep-disordered breathing (SDB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Otherwise healthy children who had been evaluated for symptoms of SDB were included. Two nocturnal PGs were performed 2-7 days apart. Demographic and clinical characteristics, Pediatric Sleep Questionnaire, and modified Epworth Sleepiness Scale were recorded. OSAS was diagnosed if obstructive apnea-hypopnea index was (oAHI) ⩾ 1/h and classified as mild (oAHI: 1-4.9/h), moderate (oAHI: 5-9.9/h), and severe (oAHI ⩾ 10/h). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were included (37.5% female, age 10.8 ± 3.9 years) to the study. There were no significant differences in oAHI values and other respiratory parameters between the two PGs (p > 0.05). Thirty-nine children were diagnosed with OSAS if the highest oAHI over any single night was used for diagnosis. Thirty-three of the 39 children (84.6%) were diagnosed with OSAS with the first PG while 35 of 39 (89.7%) children were diagnosed with OSAS with the second PG. There was an agreement for identifying OSAS and its severity between the two PGs in our study even though there were few individual intra-subject differences in oAHI. CONCLUSION: There was no significant first-night effect for PG in this study which suggests that a single night PG is adequate for diagnosis of OSAS in children with SDB- related symptoms.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".