ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2021
Effects of age and sex on the performance of the NoSAS score as a screening tool for obstructive sleep apnea: a hospital-based retrospective study in China.
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2021. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Chinese Adults: Optimizing STOP-Bang and NoSAS Cutoff Values.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- A nomogram for predicting tongue collapse in DISE based on UACT findings in OSA patients.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025Article
- Establishment and Application Evaluation of an Improved Obstructive Sleep Apnea Screening Questionnaire for Chinese Community: The CNCQ-OSA.Nature and science of sleep · 2023Article
- Comparison of six assessment tools to screen for obstructive sleep apnea in patients with hypertension.Clinical cardiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe NoSAS score has been shown to be a reliable screening tool for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in overall populations. This study aimed to explore the effects of age and sex on the predicting performance of this score.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 1119 subjects aged ≥ 18 years and with a total sleep time of ≥ 4 h during overnight polysomnography. Discrimination was assessed by using areas under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCs), while predictive parameters were calculated by using contingency tables.
resultsOverall, a NoSAS score of 8 points or higher resulted in sensitivity, specificity, and AUC for predicting an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of ≥ 20 events/h of 74%, 36%, and 0.63 (in non-elderly 73%, 46%, and 0.65; in elderly 91%, 17%, and 0.59; in men 85%, 18%, and 0.56; in women 52%, 76%, and 0.71, respectively). The AUCs at all AHI cutoffs were significantly lower in men than in women (all with p < 0.01), while the AUCs at AHI cutoff of 5, 15, and 30 events/h were significantly lower in elderly than in non-elderly (p < 0.01, 0.05, and 0.05, respectively). In non-elderly, a conventional NoSAS with cutoff of 7 or a modified NoSAS with age cutoff of 50 years provided sensitivity and specificity for predicting an AHI of ≥ 20 events/h of 87%, 37% and 80%, 36%, respectively, with comparable AUCs. In women, a conventional NoSAS with cutoff of 6 or a modified NoSAS with neck circumference cutoff of 35 cm provided sensitivity and specificity for predicting an AHI of ≥ 20 events/h of 85%, 39% and 79%, 52%, respectively, with comparable AUCs.
conclusionsNoSAS score has better discrimination but lower sensitivity for predicting OSA in non-elderly and women than in their counterparts. Age- and sex-specific cutoff values reverse this imbalance. Our results underline the preference of age- and sex-specific cutoff values and the need for better age- and sex-specific screening algorithms.
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.