Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 196

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluation of Home versus Laboratory Polysomnography in the Diagnosis of Sleep Apnea Syndrome

PORTIER, FLORENCE, PORTMANN, ADRIANA, CZERNICHOW, PIERRE, VASCAUT, LIONEL, DEVIN, ETIENNE, BENHAMOU, DANIEL, CUVELIER, ANTOINE, MUIR, JEAN FRANÇOIS·2000·American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare home polysomnography (HoPSG) with laboratory polysomnography (LabPSG) in the diagnosis of sleep apnea syndrome (SAS). A total of 103 patients referred for investigation of SAS underwent two full polysomnographies, using the portable Minisomno device at home and the Respisomnographe in the laboratory (both devices manufactured by the same company). Twenty percent of home-studied device polysomnography (HoSD-PSG) recordings and 5% of LabPSG recordings were excluded from analysis either because of lost data or poor quality data. Sleep stage distribution and subjective quality of sleep were similar by both methods. Using LabPSG, the mean (+/- SD) RDI was 25.7 (+/- 30.6) versus 22.8 (+/- 31.5) using HoSD-PSG (p > 0.05). Absolute differences between the home and laboratory respiratory disturbance index (RDI) were less than 10 for 65% of patients. Discordant RDIs (i.e., differences greater than 10) were observed for 63% of individuals with severe SAS (RDI > 30) versus 22% of those with normal or moderate SAS (RDI </= 30) (p < 0.05). Higher RDI differences were associated with poor airflow signal at home. Forty-seven percent of patients preferred LabPSG. Our results suggest that HoSD-PSG was not feasible for 33% of patients; there was no evidence of a better quality of sleep and recording tolerance at home; the reliability of HoSD-PSG for SAS diagnosis depends on the quality of data obtained under unattended conditions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1164/ajrccm.162.3.9908002

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 196

Metadata

Authors
PORTIER, F., PORTMANN, A., CZERNICHOW, P., VASCAUT, L., DEVIN, E., BENHAMOU, D., CUVELIER, A., & MUIR, J. F.
Venue
American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Published
2000-09-01
Volume
162
Issue
3
Pages
814-818
ISSN
  • 1073-449X (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-4970
OpenAlex
W2024885035
Cited by
196
References
2
FWCI
3.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of Home versus Laboratory Polysomnography in the Diagnosis of Sleep Apnea Syndrome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/ajrccm.162.3.9908002
The paper
PORTIER, F., PORTMANN, A., CZERNICHOW, P., VASCAUT, L., DEVIN, E., BENHAMOU, D., CUVELIER, A., & MUIR, J. F. (2000). Evaluation of Home versus Laboratory Polysomnography in the Diagnosis of Sleep Apnea Syndrome. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.162.3.9908002

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.