MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388693210 · doi:10.1111/jsr.14099

Healthcare resource utilisation and costs in patients with treated obstructive sleep apnea

2023· article· en· W4388693210 on OpenAlexaff
K.L. Sterling, Naomi Alpert, Peter A. Cistulli, Jean‐Louis Pépin, Suyog More, Kate Cole, Atul Malhotra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sleep Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsGreenfield Research (Canada)
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteAgence Nationale de la RechercheUniversity of California, San DiegoFondation Université Grenoble AlpesNational Institutes of HealthLivaNovaNational Institute on AgingEli Lilly and CompanyResMedJazz Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsMedicineObstructive sleep apneaHealth careInternal medicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a highly prevalent yet underdiagnosed disease that creates a large economic burden on the United States healthcare system. In this retrospective study, we tested the hypothesis that adherence to positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy, the 'gold standard' treatment for OSA, is associated with reduced healthcare resource utilisation and costs. We linked de-identified payer-sourced medical claims and objective PAP usage data for patients newly diagnosed with OSA. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to create balanced groups of patients who were either adherent, intermediately adherent, or non-adherent to PAP therapy. From a sample of 179,542 patients (average age 52.5 years, 61% male), 37% were adherent, 40% intermediate, and 23% non-adherent. During the first year, PAP adherence was significantly associated with fewer emergency room visits (mean [SD] adherent: 0.39 [1.20] versus intermediate: 0.47 [1.30], p < 0.001; versus non-adherent: 0.54 [1.44], p < 0.001), all-cause hospitalisations (mean [SD] adherent: 0.09 [0.43] versus intermediate: 0.12 [0.51], p < 0.001; versus non-adherent: 0.13 [0.55], p < 0.001), and lower total costs (mean [SD] adherent $5874 [8045] versus intermediate $6523 [9759], p < 0.001; versus non-adherent $6355 [10,517], p < 0.001). Results were similar in the second year of PAP use. These results provide additional evidence from a large, diverse sample to support the diagnosis and treatment of OSA and encourage long-term adherence to PAP therapy.

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)0.003
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 score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.703

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations24
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sleep ResearchSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207