MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2608716163 · doi:10.1093/sleepj/zsx050.520

0521 IMPACT OF MASK TYPE ON CONTINUOUS POSITIVE AIRWAY PRESSURE EFFICACY AND COMPLIANCE: A META-ANALYSIS

2017· article· en· W2608716163 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sanlian Hu, Linlin Chen, Ming‐Tzer Lin, P Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContinuous positive airway pressureMeta-analysisObstructive sleep apneaSubgroup analysisOdds ratioRandomized controlled trialSleep apneaAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the standard treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The impact of the mask type on the efficacy and acceptance of CPAP is inconclusive. The present study aimed to compare the effects and compliance of oronasal and nasal mask by the meta-analysis of the existing trials. Studies were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL up to August 2016. The literature was reviewed by two independent authors. The mean difference of residual apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), therapeutic pressure, usage hour, and preference between oronasal and nasal mask was quantified. The pooled effect was analyzed with random-effect generic inverse variance and the heterogeneity was assessed with I2. From 6070 articles, 13 studies comprising 4000 subjects were included for the meta-analysis. The number of recruited subjects was different and the recruited trials were heterogeneous for all four outcomes. The 寫Newcastle-Ottawa scale showed that two studies (120 subjects) enrolling participants inadequately response to oronasal CPAP were biased. Compared to nasal masks, the oronasal masks had higher residual AHI for 5.5/hour (95% CI 2.3–8.8, p<0.001, I2 94%, 676 subjects), higher therapeutic pressure for 1 cmH2O (0–2.1, p=0.05, I2 76%, 534 subjects), and shorter usage per night for 0.8 hour (-1.06 - -0.54, p<0.001, I2 25%, 1364 subjects), and less preferred (odds ratio 0.05, 95% CI 0–0.6, p=0.02, 153 subjects). The subgroup analysis of 11 unbiased trials (3880 subjects) gave the same results for all four outcomes. Subgroup analysis of 5 randomized control trials (RCT) (176 subjects) had similar results except that therapeutic pressure was similar between two masks (p=0.97). The present studies showed that oronasal masks were associated with higher residual AHI, higher therapeutic pressure, shorter usage, and less preference compared to nasal masks. This study was supported by National Taiwan University (NTU) Hospital (105-S2998), Ministry of Science and Technology (103-2314-B-002-139-MY3), and NTU (NTU-ERP-105R8951-1).

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207