ArticleSleep medicine2023
Sleep testing during the pandemic.
Article in Sleep medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence of diagnosed idiopathic hypersomnia among adults in the United States 2019-2023: analysis of healthcare claims.Sleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of the Alice NightOne Single-Belt Monitor for Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Reliability of Wireless Data Transfer.Nature and science of sleep · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the U.S. healthcare system, reducing the capacity available for unrelated conditions, such as sleep disordered breathing, and increasing concerns about the safety of in-lab testing. This study characterizes how the pandemic impacted the assessment of sleep disordered breathing and use of associated services.
methodsSleep testing claims occurring between January 2019 and June 2021 were extracted from the database of a national healthcare organization. Utilization was trended. Logistic regressions were run to assess the association between quarter of initial testing, whether testing was followed by treatment, and whether testing was followed by a clinical visit with a diagnosis related to sleep apnea, after controlling for patient-related factors. A Cox proportional hazards model assessed factors influencing time to treatment. Finally, a logistic regression assessed factors influencing the finality of home-based testing.
resultsIn Q2 2021, home-based testing utilization was 134% of its initial level, while in-lab and split night testing were both at 61% of initial levels. Patients receiving initial home-based testing did not significantly differ in their likelihood of treatment, but were significantly less likely to have a clinical visit for sleep apnea (P < 0.01). Patients initially tested in 2021 were treated significantly more quickly than those initially tested in Q1 2019. Home-based testing occurring in Q4 2019 or later was significantly more likely to be definitive than home-based testing occurring Q1 2019.
conclusionsHome-based sleep testing increased significantly and durably in 2020, and was associated with faster time to treatment than initial in-lab testing.
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.