CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 102Sleep and related disordersObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchSleep and Work-Related Fatigue

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical utility of the Epworth sleepiness scale

Walker, Nathan A, Sunderram, Jag, Zhang, Peng, Lu, Shou-en, Scharf, Matthew T·2020·Sleep and Breathing
DOI 10.1007/s11325-020-02015-2
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose The Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) is a widely used tool which has been validated as a measure of sleepiness. However, the scores within individual patients referred for clinical sleep services vary considerably which may limit the clinical use of the ESS. We sought to determine the test-retest reliability of the ESS if scores were classified as either normal or sleepy.Methods We measured the ESS in patients presenting to our sleep center at a clinical visit and again when a sleep study was done. Demographic and clinical information was extracted from the electronic medical record.Results Average ESS scores were similar on 2 administrations, mean (SD) of 9.8 (5.4) and 10.2 (6.2). Bland-Altman analysis showed upper and lower limits of agreement of 7.5 and - 6.7, respectively. No demographic or clinical variables were identified which contributed to the intra-individual variability. Of the patients who presented with an initial ESS < 11, 80% had a second ESS < 11. Of the patients who presented with an initial ESS ≥ 11, 89% had a second ESS ≥ 11. Cohen's kappa for the two administrations of the ESS was 0.67 (95% CI of 0.51-0.83). Using previously published reports, we calculated Cohen's kappa for polysomnographic determination of the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) with values ranging from 0.26 to 0.69.Conclusions Individual ESS scores varied considerably within individual patients, but with classification into either normal or sleepy, the test-retest reliability was substantial and in line with other clinical measures including polysomnographic determination of the AHI.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11325-020-02015-2

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 102

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Walker, N. A., Sunderram, J., Zhang, P., Lu, S.-E., & Scharf, M. T.
Affiliations
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Corresponding author
Scharf, Matthew T
ORCID
Venue
Sleep and Breathing
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-01-14
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
1759-1765
ISSN
  • 1520-9512 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1709
DOI
10.1007/s11325-020-02015-2
OpenAlex
W2999829930
Cited by
102
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 2
FWCI
11.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Sleep And Breathing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Keywords
Epworth Sleepiness Scale, daytime sleepiness, test-retest reliability, sleep apnea, apnea-hypopnea index, polysomnography, kappa statistic, Bland-Altman analysis
MeSH terms
Sleepiness, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Retrospective Studies, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review