ArticleZdravstveno varstvo2024
Validation of the Slovene Version of the Stop-Bang Questionnaire in a Primary Practice Setting.
Article in Zdravstveno varstvo, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychometric Validation of the Epworth Sleepiness Scale for Children and Adolescents (ESS-CHAD) in Slovenia: Implications for Public Health Research and Practice.Zdravstveno varstvo · 2026Article
- A Prospective Observational Study Investigating the Relationship Between Vitamin D Deficiency and STOP-Bang Parameters in Elderly Populations.Nature and science of sleep · 2025Article
- Two-stage screening for obstructive sleep apnea in the primary practice setting.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The aim of our study was to validate the Slovene translation of the STOP-BANG (SBQ) questionnaire for use in the primary practice setting. Methods: We recruited 158 randomly selected visitors at four primary practice clinics who came to the practice for any reason. Participants completed the Slovene SBQ and underwent type 3 respiratory polygraphy, which was analysed by an experienced somnologist. The SBQ was previously translated in to Slovene and validated for the sleep clinic. Results: Of 158 participants, 153 had valid recordings. The mean age of the participants was 49.5 years (±13.0 years), and 47.7% were male. OSA was identified in 49.0% of the participants. The questionnaire, with a cutoff of ≥3, demonstrated an area under the curve of 0.823 for any OSA (REI≥5), 0.819 for moderate and severe OSA (REI≥15) and 0.847 for severe OSA (REI≥30). Sensitivity was 65.3%, 81.8%, and 90.0%, and specificity was 87.2%, 73.3% and 65.0% for any, moderate to severe and severe OSA, respectively. Conclusions: The Slovene translation of the SBQ is a reliable instrument for OSA risk stratification in the primary practice setting.
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.