4.6 Article

Sex differences in the associations of obstructive sleep apnoea with epidemiological factors

期刊

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY JOURNAL
卷 51, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.02421-2017

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Health [UM1 CA186107, UM1 CA176726, UM1 CA167552]
  2. American Heart Association Postdoctoral Fellowship (Founders Affiliate) Award [16POST27480007]
  3. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [UM1CA186107, UM1CA167552, UM1CA176726] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the well-known male predominance in the prevalence of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA), sex differences in the associations between OSA and a comprehensive range of epidemiological factors remain less clear. We examined the prevalence of self-reported OSA in 143326 females (age 48-93 years) from the Nurses' Health Study (NHS) and NHS-II and 22896 males from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (age 65-101 years) in 2012-2013. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the sex-specific prevalence odds ratios (pOR) and 95% confidence intervals of OSA by demographic, anthropometric, lifestyle and comorbidity factors. The overall prevalence of self-reported OSA was 6.4% in females and 13.8% in males. After mutual adjustment, the associations of OSA with physical inactivity, hypertension and daytime sleepiness were stronger in females, whereas the associations with waist circumference and witnessed apnoea were stronger in males (p-heterogeneity <0.01). There were qualitative sex differences in the associations with age (pOR per 5-year increment in females 0.95, 95% CI 0.94-0.96, and males 1.04, 1.01-1.08; p-heterogeneity <0.0001) and marital status (pOR for married versus other in females 0.85, 95% CI 0.81-0.89, and males 1.11, 0.99-1.25; p-heterogeneity <0.0001). Substantial sex differences exist in the associations with various factors, suggesting sex-specific mechanisms in OSA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据