SynthesisJournal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine2025
Awake speech recordings for machine learning diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea: a Bayesian meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Accuracy of Artificial Intelligence in Diagnosing Obstructive Sleep Apnea Using Photoplethysmography: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial Intelligence Diagnosis of Obstructive Sleep Apnea Using Overnight Pulse Oximetry: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Three-class obstructive sleep apnea severity assessment: a parallel AHI and ODI explainable artificial intelligence framework using craniofacial-enriched clinical data.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a prevalent but underdiagnosed condition linked to serious health risks. Due to the limited accessibility of polysomnography (PSG), AI (Artificial Intelligence)-based speech analysis has gained attention as a non-invasive screening tool. This Bayesian meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of AI models trained on awake speech and examines factors affecting performance.
methodsWe systematically searched Medline/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE Xplore databases. Eligible studies included adults with OSA diagnosis via in-lab polysomnography or home sleep apnea tests and evaluated AI models using speech recordings. Models evaluated using random-split test sets or k-fold cross-validation were included in a Bayesian bivariate meta-analysis and meta-regression. Publication bias was examined using a selection model approach, while risk of bias and evidence quality were assessed with QUADAS-2 and GRADE.
resultsFrom 6,254 screened articles, 8 studies comprising 24 AI models, trained and tested on 1,060 and 825 participants were included. All studies used professional microphone recordings in the controlled hospital settings. AI models analysing awake speech recordings demonstrated pooled sensitivity and specificity of 82.9% (95% CrI: 80.0-86.4%) and 83.3% (95% CrI: 80.7-86.1%), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio was 24.3 (95% CrI: 18.2-35.0). Higher mean age improved sensitivity. No significant effects were seen for OSA severity, model type, OSA prevalence, or male percentage. Publication bias was not evident.
conclusionAI models trained on awake speech recordings demonstrate good diagnostic accuracy for OSA and hold potential as a practical, scalable screening tool in both clinical and community-based settings.
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.