The Assessment of a New Technology for Evaluating Respiratory Abnormalities in Sleep
German Nino‐Murcia, Donald L. Bliwise, Sharon Keenan, William C. Dement
Abstract
German Nino‐Murcia, Donald L. Bliwise, Sharon Keenan, William C. Dement
Abstract
This study assessed the diagnostic utility of two technologies for evaluating respiratory abnormalities in sleep. We compared conventional polysomnography with a new, ambulatory microprocessor technology. Two key features of the comparison involved: (a) the use of multiple, skilled interpreters of each system; and (b) inter-rater agreement within the systems as a crucial test for the diagnostic utility of each. Results indicated that general categories of respiratory abnormalities could be judged more reliably than more specific categories, regardless of technology. For certain categories of respiratory abnormalities, however, inter-rater agreement with the newer technology was extremely low (e.g., reliability coefficients of .12, .09, and -0.6). Factors contributing to these low diagnostic reliabilities are discussed. Our data indicate that any assessment of new technology cannot be made apart from the clinical judgments to be rendered with that new technology. This approach may be generalizable to the assessment of other diagnostic technologies.
OpenAlex reports 3 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This study assessed the diagnostic utility of two technologies for evaluating respiratory abnormalities in sleep. We compared conventional polysomnography with a new, ambulatory microprocessor technology. Two key features of the comparison involved: (a) the use of multiple, skilled interpreters of each system; and (b) inter-rater agreement within the systems as a crucial test for the diagnostic utility of each. Results indicated that general categories of respiratory abnormalities could be judged more reliably than more specific categories, regardless of technology. For certain categories of respiratory abnormalities, however, inter-rater agreement with the newer technology was extremely low (e.g., reliability coefficients of .12, .09, and -0.6). Factors contributing to these low diagnostic reliabilities are discussed. Our data indicate that any assessment of new technology cannot be made apart from the clinical judgments to be rendered with that new technology. This approach may be generalizable to the assessment of other diagnostic technologies.
Key concepts: Polysomnography, Reliability (semiconductor), Technology assessment, Medicine, Sleep (system call), Health technology, Respiratory system, Interpreter