Abstract

Abstract

Abstract
Background/Objectives: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) classification relies on polysomnography (PSG) results. Current guidelines recommend the development of clinical prediction algorithms in screening prior to PSG. A recent intuitive and user-friendly tool (OSABayes), based on a Bayesian network model using six clinical variables, has been proposed to quantify the probability of OSA. Our aims are (1) to validate OSABayes prospectively, (2) to build a smartphone app based on the proposed model, and (3) to evaluate app usability. Methods: We prospectively included adult patients suspected of OSA, without suspicion of other sleep disorders, who underwent level I or III diagnostic PSG. Apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and OSABayes probabilities were obtained and compared using the area under the ROC curve (AUC [95%CI]) for OSA diagnosis (AHI >= 5/h) and higher severity levels (AHI >= 15/h) prediction. We built the OSABayes app on 'App Inventor 2', and the usability was assessed with a cognitive walkthrough method and a general evaluation. Results: 216 subjects were included in the validation cohort, performing PSG levels I (34%) and III (66%). OSABayes presented an AUC of 83.6% [77.3-90.0%] for OSA diagnosis and 76.3% [69.9-82.7%] for moderate/severe OSA prediction, showing good response for both types of PSG. The OSABayes smartphone application allows one to calculate the probability of having OSA and consult information about OSA and the tool. In the usability evaluation, 96% of the proposed tasks were carried out. Conclusions: These results show the good discrimination power of OSABayes and validate its applicability in identifying patients with a high pre-test probability of OSA. The tool is available as an online form and as a smartphone app, allowing a quick and accessible calculation of OSA probability.

Abstract
Obstructive sleep apnea is a heterogeneous sleep disorder with varying phenotypes. Several studies have already performed cluster analyses to discover various obstructive sleep apnea phenotypic clusters. However, the selection of the clustering method might affect the outputs. Consequently, it is unclear whether similar obstructive sleep apnea clusters can be reproduced using different clustering methods. In this study, we applied four well-known clustering methods: Agglomerative Hierarchical Clustering; K-means; Fuzzy C-means; and Gaussian Mixture Model to a population of 865 suspected obstructive sleep apnea patients. By creating five clusters with each method, we examined the effect of clustering methods on forming obstructive sleep apnea clusters and the differences in their physiological characteristics. We utilized a visualization technique to indicate the cluster formations, Cohen's kappa statistics to find the similarity and agreement between clustering methods, and performance evaluation to compare the clustering performance. As a result, two out of five clusters were distinctly different with all four methods, while three other clusters exhibited overlapping features across all methods. In terms of agreement, Fuzzy C-means and K-means had the strongest (kappa = 0.87), and Agglomerative hierarchical clustering and Gaussian Mixture Model had the weakest agreement (kappa = 0.51) between each other. The K-means showed the best clustering performance, followed by the Fuzzy C-means in most evaluation criteria. Moreover, Fuzzy C-means showed the greatest potential in handling overlapping clusters compared with other methods. In conclusion, we revealed a direct impact of clustering method selection on the formation and physiological characteristics of obstructive sleep apnea clusters. In addition, we highlighted the capability of soft clustering methods, particularly Fuzzy C-means, in the application of obstructive sleep apnea phenotyping.

Abstract

Abstract
Objectives: To describe baseline clinical characteristics of adult patients with COVID-19. Methods: We conducted a scoping review of the evidence available at LitCovid, until March 23th, 2020, and selected articles that reported the prevalence of socio-demographic characteristics, symptoms and co-morbidities in adults with COVID-19. Results: In total, 1 572 publications were published on LitCovid. We have included 56 articles in our analysis, with 89% conducted in China, and 75% contained inpatients. Three studies were conducted in North America and one in Europe. Participants age ranged from 28 to 70 years, with balanced gender distribution. Proportion of asymptomatic cases were from 2 to 79%. The most common reported symptoms were fever [4-99%], cough [4-92%], dyspnoea/shortness of breath [1-90%], fatigue 4-89%], myalgia [3-65%], and pharyngalgia [2-61%], while regarding co-morbidities we found cardiovascular disease [1-40%], hypertension [0-40%] and cerebrovascular disease [1-40%]. Such heterogeneity impairs the conduction of meta-analysis. Conclusions: The infection by COVID-19 seems to affect people in a very diverse manner and with different characteristics. With the available data it is not possible to clearly identify those at higher risk of being infected with this condition. Furthermore, the evidence from countries other than China is, at the day, too scarce.