Observational studySleep2022
The diagnostic value of sleep and vigilance tests in central disorders of hypersomnolence.
Observational study in Sleep, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Boundary-Dependent Sleep-Wake Dysregulation in Idiopathic Hypersomnia.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026Article
- Article
- Diagnostic challenges and burden of idiopathic hypersomnia: a systematic literature review.Sleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society · 2024Article
- U-Sleep's resilience to AASM guidelines.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- Eyelid Closure Behavior of Patients with Idiopathic and Nonorganic Hypersomnia, Narcolepsy-Cataplexy, and Healthy Controls in the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test.Nature and science of sleep · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesThis retrospective cross-sectional observational study explored the diagnostic value of selected sleep and vigilance tests (SVT) beyond the multiple sleep latency test to differentiate between various central disorders of hypersomnolence (CDH) and fatigue syndromes.
methodsData from patients who underwent the multiple sleep latency test and at least one additional SVT were extracted from the Bern sleep database (1997-2018). One thousand three hundred fifty-two patients with a CDH (106 narcolepsy type 1, 90 narcolepsy type 2, 119 idiopathic hypersomnia, 192 nonorganic hypersomnia, 205 insufficient sleep syndrome), fatigue syndromes (n = 183), and a subgroup of patients with sleep apnea (n = 457) were analyzed. Classification based on SVT parameters was compared with the final clinical diagnosis serving as a reference.
resultsAn overall model predicted the final diagnosis in 49.5% of patients. However, for the pairwise differentiation of two clinically suspected diagnoses, many SVT parameters showed a sensitivity and specificity above 70%. While the overall discrimination power of the multiple sleep latency test was slightly better than the one of the maintenance of wakefulness test, the latter differentiated best between narcolepsy and idiopathic hypersomnia with prolonged sleep need. Disproportionally poor results in reaction tests (e.g. steer clear test), despite comparable or lower sleepiness levels (SLAT, WLAT), were valuable for differentiating nonorganic hypersomnia from idiopathic hypersomnia/sleep insufficiency syndrome.
conclusionThis study demonstrates how the combination of a careful clinical assessment and a selection of SVTs can improve the differentiation of CDH, whereas it was not possible to establish an overall prediction model based on SVTs alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35038747What 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.