The effect of nocturnal wear of complete dentures on sleep and oral health related quality of life: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Edentulism and sleep disturbance are chronic conditions that are common in older people and have serious adverse consequences for their functioning and quality of life. Edentulism can disturb sleep through the alteration of the craniofacial structure and surrounding soft tissue. However, the effect of prosthetic rehabilitation of edentulism on sleep quality is still not well understood. The objectives of this study are to test whether nocturnal denture wear affects sleep quality, daytime sleepiness, and the oral health related quality of life of edentate older people with moderate to severe sleep apnea, and to identify modifiers of effect of nocturnal denture wear. METHODS/DESIGN: We will carry out a single-blind randomized cross-over trial. Seventy edentate older people with moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea will be enrolled. The study participants will be assigned to wear and not wear their dentures on alternate periods of 30 days. The outcome measures will be sleep quality (assessed by portable polysomnography), daytime sleepiness (assessed by the Epworth Sleepiness Scale), and oral health related quality of life (assessed by validated questionnaire). A number of characteristics (sociodemographic, oropharyngeal morphology, oral and prosthesis characteristics, and perceived general health quality of life) will be assessed by means of clinical examination, 3D imaging of the craniofacial structure, and validated questionnaires at baseline. Linear mixed effects regression models for repeated measures will be fitted to test the study hypotheses. The main analyses will be based on the intention-to-treat principle. To assess the robustness of the findings to potential incomplete adherence, sensitivity analyses will be conducted while applying the per-protocol principle. DISCUSSION: This practice-relevant evidence could represent a preventive approach to improve sleep characteristics of the older population and improve their well-being and quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01868295.
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 | 0.028 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.063 | 0.010 |
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".