Relationship Between Hours of CPAP Use and Achieving Normal Levels of Sleepiness and Daily Functioning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Evidence suggests that, to maintain treatment effects, nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) needs to be used every night. What remains unknown is the nightly duration of use required to normalize functioning. This study, employing probit analyses and piecewise regression to estimate dose-response functions, estimated likelihoods of return to normal levels of sleepiness and daily functioning relative to nightly duration of CPAP. DESIGN: Multicenter, quasi-experimental study. SETTING: Seven sleep centers in the United States and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with severe OSA (total cohort n = 149; the numbers of included participants from 85 - 120, depending on outcome analyzed.) INTERVENTIONS: CPAP. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Before treatment and again after 3 months of therapy, participants completed a day of testing that included measures of objective and subjective daytime sleepiness and functional status. There were significant differences in mean nightly CPAP duration between treatment responders and nonresponders across outcomes. Thresholds above which further improvements were less likely relative to nightly duration of CPAP were identified for Epworth Sleepiness Scale score (4 hours), Multiple Sleep Latency Test (6 hours), and Functional Outcomes associated with Sleepiness Questionnaire (7.5 hours). A linear dose-response relationship (P < 0.01) between increased use and achieving normal levels was shown for objective and subjective daytime sleepiness, but only up to 7 hours use for functional status. CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses suggest that a greater percentage of patients will achieve normal functioning with longer nightly CPAP durations, but what constitutes adequate use varies between different outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".