MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025164727 · doi:10.1007/s11325-006-0078-6

Efficacy and patient satisfaction with autoadjusting CPAP with variable expiratory pressure vs standard CPAP: a two-night randomized crossover trial

2006· article· en· W2025164727 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSleep And Breathing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal HealthVancouver General HospitalVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContinuous positive airway pressureCrossover studyRandomized controlled trialNeurologyOtorhinolaryngologyPatient satisfactionAnesthesiaPhysical therapyObstructive sleep apneaAlternative medicineInternal medicineSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expiratory pressure relief (C-Flex) technology monitors the patient's airflow during expiration and reduces the pressure in response to the patient. Increased comfort levels associated with C-Flex therapy have potential to improve patient adherence to therapy. The purpose of this study was to assess the combination of autoadjusting CPAP (APAP) and C-Flex in terms of (1) treatment efficacy, and (2) patient preference when compared to standard CPAP. Fifteen patients who had previously undergone formal CPAP titration polysomnography were treated with either one night of the APAP with C-Flex or one night of conventional CPAP, in a crossover trial. Patient satisfaction levels were recorded using visual analog scales (VAS) on the morning after the study. Mean patient age was 50 +/- 12 years, body mass index (BMI) was 36 +/- 6 kg/m(2), baseline AHI was 53 +/- 31 events/h, and CPAP Pressure was 11 +/- 2 cm/H(2)O. APAP with C-Flex was as effective as CPAP, with no differences detected in sleep latency (17 +/- 5 vs 12.3 +/- 3 min, p = 0.4), or respiratory indices (AHI of 4.2 +/- 2 vs 2.4 +/- 0.7 events/h, p = 0.1). VAS scores (scale 0-10) indicated a trend towards increased patient satisfaction while using APAP with C-Flex (7.9 vs 7.2, p = 0.07). 10 patients expressed a preference for APAP with C-Flex (VAS, 0 to 10) over standard CPAP (total positive score of 68, mean score of 4.8 +/- 4.3). One patient expressed no preference. Four patients expressed a preference for CPAP (total positive score of 13, mean score of 0.9 +/- 1.9) (APAP with C-Flex vs standard CPAP, p < 0.01 paired t test). APAP with C-Flex eliminates sleep disordered breathing as effectively as standard CPAP. Patients indicated a preference for APAP with C-Flex suggesting a possible advantage in terms of patient adherence for this mode of treatment.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.782

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it