Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 650

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Inability of Clinical History to Distinguish Primary Snoring From Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome in Children

Open access
Carroll, John L., McColley, Susanna A., Marcus, Carole L., Curtis, Shelly, Loughlin, Gerald M.·1995·Chest

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether primary snoring (PS) could be distinguished from childhood obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) by clinical history. DESIGN: Retrospective study of clinical history of 83 children with snoring and/or sleep disordered breathing who were referred for polysomnography. SETTING: Tertiary referral center; pediatric pulmonary sleep apnea clinic. MEASUREMENTS: We evaluated the ability of a clinical obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) score and other questions about sleep, breathing, and daytime symptoms to distinguish PS from OSAS in children. Parents were asked about the child's snoring, difficulty breathing, observed apnea, cyanosis, struggling to breathe, shaking the child to "make him or her breathe," watching the child sleep, afraid of apnea, the frequency and loudness of snoring, and daytime symptoms such as excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS). RESULTS: Based on polysomnography results, 48 patients were classified as PS and 35 as OSAS. Peak endtidal CO2 (49 +/- 3.2 vs 55 +/- 8.2 [SD] mm Hg); lowest arterial oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry (95 +/- 1.9 vs 82 +/- 14%); and apnea/hypopnea index (0.27 +/- .3 vs 8.4 +/- 6 events/h) indicated that the diagnostic criteria for PS versus OSA were reasonable. There were no differences between PS and OSA patients with respect to age, sex, race, failure to thrive, obesity, history of EDS, snoring history, history of cyanosis during sleep, or daytime symptoms except for mouth breathing. There were no significant differences in sleep variables between PS patients and those with any severity of OSAS. The OSA score misclassified about one of four patients. Comparing PS and OSA patients, significant findings were daytime mouth breathing (61 vs 85%; p = 0.024); observed apnea (46 vs 74%; p = 0.013); shaking the child (31 vs. 60%; p = 0.01); struggling to breathe (58 vs 89%; p = 0.003); and afraid of apnea (71 vs 91%; p = 0.028). However, none of these were sufficiently discriminatory to predict OSAS. CONCLUSION: We conclude that PS in children cannot be reliably distinguished from OSAS by clinical history alone.

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 · 10.1378/chest.108.3.610

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 650

Metadata

Authors
Carroll, J. L., McColley, S. A., Marcus, C. L., Curtis, S., & Loughlin, G. M.
Venue
Chest
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1995-09
Volume
108
Issue
3
Pages
610-618
ISSN
0012-3692 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2057225629
Cited by
650
References
0
FWCI
4.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Inability of Clinical History to Distinguish Primary Snoring From Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome in Children. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1378/chest.108.3.610
The paper
Carroll, J. L., McColley, S. A., Marcus, C. L., Curtis, S., & Loughlin, G. M. (1995). Inability of Clinical History to Distinguish Primary Snoring From Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome in Children. Chest. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.108.3.610

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.