ArticleCurrent medical science2019
Reliability and Validity of Simplified Chinese STOP-BANG Questionnaire in Diagnosing and Screening Obstructive Sleep Apnea Hypopnea Syndrome.
Article in Current medical science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Worldwide prevalence and associated risk factors of obstructive sleep apnea: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2023Pooled it
- Diagnostic accuracy of screening questionnaires for obstructive sleep apnoea in adults in different clinical cohorts: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2022Pooled it
- Use and Performance of the STOP-Bang Questionnaire for Obstructive Sleep Apnea Screening Across Geographic Regions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2021Pooled it
- Prevalence and associated factors of obstructive sleep apnea in patients with pneumoconiosis: a cross-sectional study.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- Association between glycolipids and risk of obstructive sleep apnea: A population-based study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Article
- Are the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) domains considered in the obstructive sleep apnea instruments? An integrative review.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2021Review
- Diagnostic performance of the STOP-Bang questionnaire as a screening tool for obstructive sleep apnea in different ethnic groups.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2021Observational
- [A modified STOP-Bang questionnaire for OSA screening in the young, middle-age women].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The main purpose of this study was to assess the reliability and validity of the simplified Chinese STOP-BANG Questionnaire (SBQ) as a diagnosing and screening tool for obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS). Two hundred and ten patients with suspected OSAHS were recruited in this study. The simplified Chinese SBQ was completed twice before and after polysomnography (PSG) monitoring. SPSS 20.0 was used to analyze the test-retest reliability, discriminant validity, comparative validity and predictive validity of the SBQ. Fourteen patients were excluded on account of fragmentary data, and valid 196 were divided into four groups: non-OSAHS group (n=28, 14.29%), mild OSAHS group (n=28, 14.29%), moderate OSAHS group (n=31, 15.81%) and severe OSAHS group (n=109, 55.61%). The test-retest coefficient for the first four items was 0.810, 0.679, 0.775, 0.963 respectively and the total score of the STOP questionnaire was 0.854. The analysis of discriminant validity revealed that there were significant differences among four groups in the total score of the SBQ and scores of item 1, 3, 7 and 8, which were also validated between patients with normal blood oxygen saturation and different degrees of hypoxemia. The SBQ evaluation showed low consistency with diagnostic gold standard PSG (κ=0.303, P<0.05). When taking apnea hypopnea index (AHI) ≥5/h, ≥15/h and ≥30/h as cut-offs to evaluate the SBQ predictive value, the areas under ROC curve were 0.77, 0.81 and 0.78, the sensitivity was 90.48%, 93.57% and 93.33%, and corresponding negative predictive values were 40.74%, 66.67% and 85.19%, respectively. It was suggested that the simplified Chinese version of SBQ had good reliability, and could distinguish the severity of OSAHS. Despite its limited diagnostic accuracy, the SBQ can be considered as an ideal tool for screening OSAHS with superior predictive validity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30868502What 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.