ArticleObesity surgery2026
Validation Performance of Screening Tools for Predicting Obstructive Sleep Apnea Among Chinese Patients Undergoing Metabolic Bariatric Surgery: Insights from a Multicenter Database.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is highly prevalent among metabolic bariatric surgery patients and may increase perioperative complications; however, the performance of commonly used OSA screening tools in this population remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of B-APNEIC, STOP-BANG, GOAL, No-Apnea, NoSAS and NO-OSAS questionnaires in Chinese bariatric cohort.
methodsThis cross-sectional study utilizes data from Chinese Obesity and Metabolic Surgery (COMES) database between January 2021 and January 2025. Performance of six screening tools was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and Youden index. OSA severity was classified based on Apnea-hypopnea index (AHI): any OSA(AHI ≥ 5/h), moderate-to-severe OSA (AHI ≥ 15/h), and severe OSA(AHI ≥ 30/h).
results1740 patients were included (39.2% male) with a median age of 31.0 years and a median body mass index (BMI) of 38.9 kg/m². Overall, 77.1% had OSA, including 49.9% with moderate-to-severe OSA and 33.0% with severe OSA. Questionnaire scores were positively correlated with AHI (all p < 0.001). STOP-BANG [AUC 0.75 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-0.75)] and NO-OSAS [AUC 0.73 (95% CI: 0.71-0.75)] showed comparable performance (P = 0.727) for predicting both any OSA and moderate-to-severe OSA, outperforming GOAL, No-Apnea, NoSAS, and B-APNEIC. For severe OSA, NO-OSAS demonstrated superior performance [AUC 0.75 (95% CI: 0.73-0.77)] compared with STOP-BANG and the other questionnaires (all p < 0.05).
conclusionsSTOP-BANG and NO-OSAS demonstrated similar discriminatory ability for detecting any OSA and moderate-to-severe OSA in Chinese bariatric cohort. However, NO-OSAS may be more effective for identifying severe OSA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42113436What 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.