ArticleJournal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine2017
Validation of Polyvinylidene Fluoride Impedance Sensor for Respiratory Event Classification during Polysomnography in Children.
Article in Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Simultaneous measurement of two biological signals using a multi-layered polyvinylidene fluoride sensor.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Composites, Fabrication and Application of Polyvinylidene Fluoride for Flexible Electromechanical Devices: A Review.Micromachines · 2020Review
- Validity analysis of respiratory events of polysomnography using a plethysmography chest and abdominal belt.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2020Article
- A Potential Alternative to Respiratory Inductance Plethysmography for Children?Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesPolysomnography is the gold standard for diagnosis and characterization of severity of sleep-disordered breathing. Accuracy and reliability of the technology used are critical to the integrity of the study's interpretation. Strict criteria for obstructive sleep apnea in children are lacking and diagnosis often requires consideration of frequency of respiratory events in addition to other measures. Current American Academy of Sleep Medicine recommendations for pediatric patients includes use of respiratory inductance plethysmography (RIP) belts, whereas polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) belts are currently only acceptable for use in adults. We hypothesized that PVDF belts would be equally effective as RIP belts for detection of respiratory effort and events in children.
methodsChildren ages 2-17 y were recruited from a large pediatric tertiary referral center after obtaining consent for participation. Fifty subjects were recruited (average age, 7.8 y). Clinically relevant limits of agreement were predetermined to be a difference in total count of obstructive or central apneas or hypopneas of ± 5 events.
resultsScoring of respiratory events was not significantly different by belt type based on Bland-Altman plots of total apnea-hypopnea index and obstructive apneas. Obstructive hypopneas scoring ranged beyond our clinical limit of agreement. Findings in obese subjects were consistent with the larger sample with the exception of an increase in outliers. Artifact amount was comparable (RIP 10.9% ± 22.5% and PVDF 10.5% ± 19.5%).
conclusionsBased on these findings, PVDF belts appear to be as effective as RIP belts in detection of respiratory effort and events in children. COMMENTARY: A commentary on this article appears in this issue on page 159.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.