Upper-Airway Collapsibility and Loop Gain Predict the Response to Oral Appliance Therapy in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rationale Oral appliances (OAs) are commonly used as an alternative treatment to continuous positive airway pressure for patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). However, OAs have variable success at reducing the apnea–hypopnea index (AHI), and predicting responders is challenging. Understanding this variability may lie with the recognition that OSA is a multifactorial disorder and that OAs may affect more than just upper-airway anatomy/collapsibility. Objectives The objectives of this study were to determine how OA alters AHI and four phenotypic traits (upper-airway anatomy/collapsibility and muscle function, loop gain, and arousal threshold), and baseline predictors of which patients gain the greatest benefit from therapy. Methods In a randomized crossover study, 14 patients with OSA attended two sleep studies with and without their OA. Under each condition, AHI and the phenotypic traits were assessed. Multiple linear regression was used to determine independent predictors of the reduction in AHI. Measurements and Main Results OA therapy reduced the AHI (30 ± 5 vs. 11 ± 2 events/h; P < 0.05), which was driven by improvements in upper-airway anatomy/collapsibility under passive (1.9 ± 0.7 vs. 4.7 ± 0.6 L/min; P < 0.005) and active conditions (2.4 ± 0.9 vs. 6.2 ± 0.4 L/min; P < 0.001). No changes were seen in muscle function, loop gain, or the arousal threshold. Using multivariate analysis, baseline passive upper-airway collapsibility and loop gain were independent predictors of the reduction in AHI (r2 = 0.70; P = 0.001). Conclusions Our findings suggest that OA therapy improves the upper-airway collapsibility under passive and active conditions. Importantly, a greater response to therapy occurred in those patients with a mild anatomic compromise and a lower loop gain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it