ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2025
"The M-APNE score: an objective screening tool for OSA highlighting the area under the inspiratory flow-volume curve".
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPolysomnography (PSG) is resource-intensive but remains the gold standard for diagnosing Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA). We aimed to develop a screening tool to better allocate resources by identifying individuals at higher risk for OSA, overcoming limitations of current tools that may under-diagnose based on self-reported symptoms.
methodsA total of 884 patients (490 diagnosed with OSA) were included, which was divided into the training, validation, and test sets. Using multivariate logistic regression analyses, we developed a scoring system incorporating male sex, age, sawtooth pattern, area under the inspiratory flow-volume curve (AreaFI), and neck circumference to objectively identify patients at higher risk of OSA. Sensitivity and specificity were evaluated using area under the curve (AUC) metrics. The M-APNE Score was compared to other non-symptom-based tools, the No-Apnea Score and the Symptomless Multivariable Apnea Prediction (sMVAP) model, using the Delong test.
resultsThe M-APNE Score showed sensitivity rates of 79.3% in the training set, 70.8% in the test, and 80% in the validation set. ROC analysis for M-APNE score yielded AUCs of 0.82 in the training, 0.76 in the test, 0.82 in the validation set. The discriminative accuracy of M-APNE Score were found to be better than the No-Apnea Score (AUC = 0.82 vs. 0.76, p < 0.001) and the sMVAP (AUC = 0.82 vs. 0.75, p = 0.001) in the training set. Hosmer Lemeshow test indicated good calibration for M-Apne Score (p = 0.46).
conclusionsThe M-APNE Score is a robust and objective tool for OSA screening, potentially reducing classification errors and improving accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39808237What 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.