Relationship of ankyloglossia and obstructive sleep apnea: systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Recent studies have highlighted the potential role of a short lingual frenulum as a risk factor for pediatric obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. A shortened frenulum may contribute to abnormal orofacial development, leading to increased upper airway resistance and susceptibility to upper airway collapsibility during sleep. Recognizing early indicators, such as a short lingual frenulum, is crucial for prompt intervention. This systematic review aims to evaluate the association between a short lingual frenulum and the risk of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome in children. METHODS: This systematic review adheres to PRISMA criteria for a quantitative analysis. A comprehensive search was conducted on five databases until January 2024 to identify relevant studies. The selected articles underwent rigorous analysis, considering study design, sample characteristics, lingual frenulum characterization, sleep assessment methods, and key findings. RESULTS: A total of 239 references were initially identified. Finally, six studies were included in the qualitative synthesis, with four studies eligible for the quantitative synthesis. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was employed to assess study quality. Meta-analysis, supported by a moderate evidence profile according to the GRADE scale, revealed statistically significant differences, with odds ratios of 3.051 (confidence interval: 1.939 to 4.801) for a short frenulum and 12.304 (confidence interval: 6.141 to 24.653) for a high-arched palate. CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis provide evidence supporting the association between ankyloglossia and obstructive sleep apnea in children. Nevertheless, it is crucial to consider additional factors such as tongue mobility and the presence of a high-arched palate in further evaluations.
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 | 0.014 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.028 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".