ArticleCanadian respiratory journal2020
Validation of the NoSAS Score for the Screening of Sleep-Disordered Breathing in a Sleep Clinic.
Article in Canadian respiratory journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- NoSAS score and the 5-year risk of incident cerebrovascular disease: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Improving OSA screening efficiency with subjective questionnaires: integrating STOP-Bang, ESS, and Berlin.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- NoSAS score predicts cardiovascular disease in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2024Article
- Comparison of the value of the STOP-BANG questionnaire with oxygen desaturation index in screening obstructive sleep apnea in Germany.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2023Article
- International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2023Review
- 24-hour urinary potassium excretion is negatively associated with self-reported sleep quality in the general population, independently of sleep-disordered breathing.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2022Article
- Poor sleep quality is negatively associated with low cognitive performance in general population independent of self-reported sleep disordered breathing.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Association of objective and subjective parameters of obstructive sleep apnea with plasma aldosterone concentration in 2,066 hypertensive and 25,368 general population.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
- Comparison of six assessment tools to screen for obstructive sleep apnea in patients with hypertension.Clinical cardiology · 2021Article
- 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
- Clinical and Research Solutions to Manage Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is a growing number of patients with sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) referred to sleep clinics. Therefore, a simple but useful screening tool is urgent. The NoSAS score, containing only five items, has been developed and validated in population-based studies. Aim: To evaluate the performance of the NoSAS score for the screening of SDB patients from a sleep clinic in China, and to compare the predictive value of the NoSAS score with the STOP-Bang questionnaire. Methods: We enrolled consecutive patients from a sleep clinic who had undergone apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) testing by type III portable monitor device at the hospital and completed the STOP-Bang questionnaire. The NoSAS score was assessed by reviewing medical records. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of both screening tools were calculated at different AHI cutoffs to compare the performance of SDB screening. Results: Of the 596 eligible patients (397 males and 199 female), 514 were diagnosed with SDB. When predicting overall (AHI ≥ 5), moderate-to-severe (AHI ≥ 15), and severe (AHI ≥ 30) SDB, the sensitivity and specificity of the NoSAS score were 71.2, 80.4, and 83.1% and 62.4, 49.3, and 40.7%, respectively. At all AHI cutoffs, the AUC ranged from 0.688 to 0.715 for the NoSAS score and from 0.663 to 0.693 for the STOP-Bang questionnaire. The NoSAS score had the largest AUC (0.715, 95% CI: 0.655-0.775) of diagnosing SDB at AHI cutoff of ≥5 events/h. NoSAS performed better in discriminating moderate-to-severe SDB than STOP-Bang with a marginally significantly higher AUC (0.697 vs. 0.663, Conclusion: The NoSAS score had good performance on the discrimination of SDB patients in sleep clinic and can be utilized as an effective screening tool in clinical practice.
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.