MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410482265 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsaf090.0733

0733 Insomnia Severity Predicts Increased PAP Side Effects and Use in Women Veterans with Newly Diagnosed Apnea

2025· article· en· W4410482265 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mónica Kelly, G. E. Carlson, Alexander Erickson, Alaina I. Gold, Michael E. Mitchell, Constance H. Fung, Yeonsu Song, Dominika Swistun, Diane Lee, M. Safwan Badr, Donna L. Washington, Elizabeth M. Yano, Cathy Alessi, Michelle Zeidler, Jennifer Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaSleep apneaMedicineApneaObstructive sleep apneaPsychiatryInternal medicinePediatricsClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Despite positive airway pressure (PAP) being the gold-standard treatment for sleep disordered breathing (SDB), treatment adherence remains a challenge for providers and patients. Women with SDB are understudied, and understanding the difficulties associated with PAP use in this population is crucial to promoting treatment adherence. We aimed to assess the role of demographics and insomnia symptoms in PAP side effects and PAP use for women veterans. Methods We analyzed data from a randomized controlled trial of an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based intervention to promote PAP adherence vs. a sleep education control condition for women veterans newly diagnosed with SDB (NCT03377452). Data included demographics (age; body mass index, BMI; race/ethnicity), baseline assessment Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), PAP use data (days used, hours used at 30-, 60- and 90-days post-PAP initiation), and the PAP side effects subscale of the Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index (SAQLI). Analyses included Pearson correlations and t-tests. Results Of the 90 participants (Mean age = 53.2±12.8), 83 (92.2%) attempted to use PAP and completed the questionnaires. The most common PAP side effects included: upper respiratory symptoms (stuffed/congested nose = 60.2%, excessive dryness of nose/throat = 55.4%, soreness = 39.8%), mask-related issues (discomfort = 56.6%, air leak =47.0%) and insomnia-like symptoms (waking frequently = 36.6%, difficulty returning to sleep = 31.3%). There was no relationship between age, BMI, or race/ethnicity and number of PAP-related side effects, nor was there a correlation between number of PAP side effects and PAP use variables. Elevated ISI prior to initiating PAP was associated with greater number of PAP side effects, F(1, 81)=5.29, p=0.02. Worse ISI was associated with fewer days of PAP use at 90 days post-PAP initiation, F(1, 88)=4.55, p=0.04. Conclusion Insomnia symptom severity prior to initiating PAP treatment for SDB is a significant contributing factor to increased endorsement of PAP-related side effects. Pre-existing insomnia symptoms prior to PAP initiation may play a role in fewer days of PAP use in the long term. Future research should explore the impact of insomnia treatment in PAP side effects and use in women. Support (if any) VA/HSR IIR-16-244; VA/HSR RCS20-191; NIH/NHLBI K24HL143055; NIH/NHLBI K23HL157754; VA/HSR CDA 20-227

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207