MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7032975351

Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Parkinson’s Disease: Motor Subtypes and Effects of Long-acting Levodopa

2023· dissertation· en· W7032975351 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPhysics and Engineering Research Articles
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWeston Brain Institute
KeywordsObstructive sleep apneaLevodopaSleep apneaSleep (system call)Supine position
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Parkinson's disease (PD) is characterized by an array of motor and non-motor symptoms, including sleep disruption.PD can be classified into subtypes based on prominent motor symptoms such as tremor dominant (TD) and postural instability/gait difficulty (PIGD) subtypes.Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is frequent in PD and contributes to daytime sleepiness and cognitive dysfunction, however, its pathogenesis in PD is unclear.Our previous work suggests that long-acting levodopa (LALD) taken at bedtime may lead to a reduction in respiratory disturbances during sleep in PD patients.The objectives were to explore the differences in sleep structure and OSA within PD motor subtypes and to assess the magnitude of the effect of LALD taken at bedtime on OSA severity (Effect of Long-acting Levodopa on OSA in PD (ELO-PD) trial). Methods:To assess sleep and OSA within the PD motor subtypes, data was used from PD patients with or without OSA (defined as apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) 15 events/hour on overnight polysomnography) recruited for two of our group's clinical trials, including the ELO-PD trial.Patients were separated into two groups: PIGD and non-PIGD.Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine if the prevalence of OSA differed across groups.Multivariable linear regression models were used to explore differences in AHI and other respiratory parameters between groups.Sensitivity analyses with three subsets excluding patients on psychoactive medication, levodopa and/or dopaminergic agonists, or both, were performed.The ELO-PD trial was a randomized, crossover placebo-controlled pilot trial.Patients were randomized and allocated to either: group A -LALD followed by placebo or group Bplacebo followed by LALD.Treatment was administered daily at bedtime for two weeks, separated by a two-week washout period.The AHI was determined by polysomnography at screening, at the end of each treatment *Prostate issues include benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostate cancer.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

Study designOther design
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicPhysics and Engineering Research ArticlesFrench-language works237,207