MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exploring obstructive sleep apnea and sleep architecture in Parkinson's disease motor subtypes

2024· article· en· W4392103976 on OpenAlexafffund
Amanda Scanga, Andrea Benedetti, R. John Kimoff, Anne‐Louise Lafontaine, Ann Robinson, Marianne Gingras, Marta Kamińska

Bibliographic record

VenueParkinsonism & Related Disorders · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWeston Family FoundationWeston Brain InstituteAmerican Thoracic Society
KeywordsSleep architectureObstructive sleep apneaSleep (system call)MedicineParkinson's diseasePhysical medicine and rehabilitationSleep apneaDiseaseNeurosciencePsychologyPolysomnographyInternal medicineApneaComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Parkinson's disease (PD) can be divided into motor subtypes: postural instability/gait difficulty (PIGD), tremor dominant, and indeterminate. This study aimed to assess differences in sleep structure and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) between the PIGD and non-PIGD subtypes. METHODS: PD participants with or without OSA (defined as apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥ 15 events/hour on overnight polysomnography) were included. Patients were separated into two groups: PIGD and non-PIGD. Linear regression was used to explore differences in sleep, AHI, and other respiratory parameters between groups (adjusted for variables determined a priori). Logistic regression adjusted for the same variables was used to determine if the proportion of patients with OSA differed across groups. Subset analyses were performed: subset 1 excluding patients on psychoactive medication; subset 2 excluding patients taking levodopa or dopaminergic agonists (DAs) at nighttime and subset 3 excluding patients on either of the abovementioned drugs. RESULTS: 146 participants were studied. The non-PIGD group had less N3 sleep compared to the PIGD group (12.4% vs 16.9% p = 0.06), reaching significance in subsets 1 and 3. The AHI was significantly lower in the PIGD group (p = 0.047), including when medication effects were removed (p < 0.05). OSA was more frequent in the non-PIGD group, but only significantly in subset 3 (adjusted OR 0.3, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: OSA may be more severe in non-PIGD subtypes, and more frequent, in a subset free of psychoactive medication, and of levodopa and DAs, possibly owing to motor complications and dyskinesia. Future studies are required to confirm this.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueParkinsonism & Related DisordersSame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207