↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Clinical predictors of central sleep apnea evoked by positive airway pressure titration

Overview of attention for article published in Nature and science of sleep, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Clinical predictors of central sleep apnea evoked by positive airway pressure titration
Published in
Nature and science of sleep, July 2016
DOI 10.2147/nss.s110032
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matt Bianchi, Karen Gannon, Kathy Lovell, Margaret Merlino, James Mojica, Marilyn Moro

Abstract

Treatment-emergent central sleep apnea (TECSA), also called complex apnea, occurs in 5%-15% of sleep apnea patients during positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy, but the clinical predictors are not well understood. The goal of this study was to explore possible predictors in a clinical sleep laboratory cohort, which may highlight those at risk during clinical management. We retrospectively analyzed 728 patients who underwent PAP titration (n=422 split-night; n=306 two-night). Demographics and self-reported medical comorbidities, medications, and behaviors as well as standard physiological parameters from the polysomnography (PSG) data were analyzed. We used regression analysis to assess predictors of binary presence or absence of central apnea index (CAI) ≥5 during split-night PSG (SN-PSG) versus full-night PSG (FN-PSG) titrations. CAI ≥5 was present in 24.2% of SN-PSG and 11.4% of FN-PSG patients during titration. Male sex, maximum continuous positive airway pressure, and use of bilevel positive airway pressure were predictors of TECSA, and rapid eye movement dominance was a negative predictor, for both SN-PSG and FN-PSG patients. Self-reported narcotics were a positive predictor of TECSA, and the time spent in stage N2 sleep was a negative predictor only for SN-PSG patients. Self-reported history of stroke and the CAI during the diagnostic recording predicted TECSA only for FN-PSG patients. Clinical predictors of treatment-evoked central apnea spanned demographic, medical history, sleep physiology, and titration factors. Improved predictive models may be increasingly important as diagnostic and therapeutic modalities move away from the laboratory setting, even as PSG remains the gold standard for characterizing primary central apnea and TECSA.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 38%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unspecified 1 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 38%
Neuroscience 2 15%
Unspecified 1 8%
Unknown 5 38%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 August 2016.
All research outputs
#7,844,230
of 14,533,317 outputs
Outputs from Nature and science of sleep
#128
of 229 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,082
of 264,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature and science of sleep
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,533,317 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 229 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,492 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.