ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of five questionnaires for obstructive sleep apnea screening in the elderly.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Performance of six screening scores for obstructive sleep apnoea in an African population: findings from the BeSAS cross-sectional study.Sleep medicine: X · 2026Article
- Tongue function and high-risk sleep-disordered breathing in youth: age-stratified associations and interactions in a Vietnamese cross-sectional study.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2026Article
- Screening for obstructive sleep apnea in an Afro-Caribbean Population: Diagnostic performance of common questionnaires compared with respiratory polygraphy - The MASOS Study A prospective, cross-sectional, descriptive, and analytical study.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2026Article
- Depression in older adults with epilepsy: Pathophysiology and management considerations.Epilepsy & behavior : E&B · 2025Review
- Prevalence and Misperception: Exploring the Gap Between Objective and Subjective Assessment of Sleep Apnea in a Population at Increased Risk for Dementia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Improving OSA screening efficiency with subjective questionnaires: integrating STOP-Bang, ESS, and Berlin.Frontiers in medicine · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) often leads to complications in the elderly. This study compares the usefulness of five screening tools for OSA in elderly patients. Data from elderly patients diagnosed with OSA, collected from the Sleep Medicine Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University from January 2012 to June 2017, is analyzed. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, area under the curve (AUC), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of the five screening tools are computed and compared. 273 elderly patients with suspected OSA are included, of whom 189 are male (69.2%). The Berlin Questionnaire has an AUC of 0.670 (95%CI: 0.611-0.725) at different cut-off points. The sensitivity and specificity of the Berlin Questionnaire are noticeably high at 0.653 (0.587-0.719) and 0.608 (0.497-0.719), 0.699 (0.621-0.776) and 0.533 (0.449-0.616), and 0.803 (0.713-0.892) and 0.503 (0.433-0.572) when the AHI is 5, 15, and 30 times/hour, respectively. The GOAL Questionnaire has the highest DOR at AHI cut-off points of 5 and 15 times/hour, while Berlin has the highest DOR at an AHI cut-off point of 30 times/hour. Comprehensive use of these five screening questionnaires for suspected OSA in elderly patients aged 60 years and older is valuable and worth promoting among the elderly population.
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.