Facteurs de risque communs entre l’asthme et le syndrome d’apnées obstructives du sommeil chez l’adulte : revue systématique avec méta analyse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Asthma and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) are two common chronic respiratory diseases in adults. The coexistence of these affections is increasingly reported, suggesting the presence of shared pathophysiological mechanisms and common risk factors. Objective: To identify the common risk factors for asthma and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS). Method: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. The databases consulted included PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Kinedoc. Five observational cohort studies were included. The risk of bias for each study was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Qualitative analyses were complemented by quantitative analysis illustrated by meta-analyses. The methodological quality of this review was evaluated using the GRADE system and the AMSTAR 2 checklist. Results: The main risk factors analyzed were asthma, obesity, gastroesophageal reflux (GERD), and habitual snoring. Asthma was associated with an increased risk of OSAS, as was obesity. GERD was associated with the onset of asthma and tended to be a risk factor for OSAS although the latter was not statistically significant. Two meta-analyses were performed using odds ratios extracted from two studies for GERD. The overall quality of evidence ranges from low to moderate depending on the risk factors studied due to presence of selection, measurement, and confounding biases in the included studies.Conclusion: This review highlights epidemiological links between certain exposures (asthma, obesity, GERD) and the onset of asthma or OSAS. Identifying shared risk factors may improve screening and multidisciplinary management, especially in physiotherapy. Further research is needed to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.031 | 0.073 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.042 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 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".