Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Treatment of Sleepy Patients with Milder Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Results of the CPAP Apnea Trial North American Program (CATNAP) Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Twenty-eight percent of people with mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea experience daytime sleepiness, which interferes with daily functioning. It remains unclear whether treatment with continuous positive airway pressure improves daytime function in these patients. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of continuous positive airway pressure treatment to improve functional status in sleepy patients with mild and moderate obstructive sleep apnea. METHODS: Patients with self-reported daytime sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale score >10) and an apnea-hypopnea index with 3% desaturation and from 5 to 30 events per hour were randomized to 8 weeks of active or sham continuous positive airway pressure treatment. After the 8-week intervention, participants in the sham arm received 8 weeks of active continuous positive airway pressure treatment. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The Total score on the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire was the primary outcome measure. The adjusted mean change in the Total score after the first 8-week intervention was 0.89 for the active group (n = 113) and -0.06 for the placebo group (n = 110) (P = 0.006). The group difference in mean change corresponded to an effect size of 0.41 (95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.67). The mean (SD) improvement in Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire Total score from the beginning to the end of the crossover phase (n = 91) was 1.73 ± 2.50 (t[90] = 6.59; P < 0.00001) with an effect size of 0.69. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous positive airway pressure treatment improves the functional outcome of sleepy patients with mild and moderate obstructive sleep apnea.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".