Self-Efficacy and Short-Term Adherence to Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Treatment in Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study Objectives: Infants, children, and adolescents are increasingly being prescribed continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for treatment of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS), yet adherence is often poor. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between caregiver and patient-reported health cognitions about CPAP prior to starting CPAP and CPAP adherence at 1 month. We hypothesized that greater caregiver-reported self-efficacy would be positively associated with CPAP adherence in children. We also evaluated patient-reported self-efficacy and caregiver- and patient-reported risk perception and outcome expectations as they related to adherence, as well as how demographic factors influenced these relationships. Methods: A pediatric modification of the Self-Efficacy Measure for Sleep Apnea Questionnaire was administered to children and adolescents with OSAS-prescribed CPAP and their caregivers during the clinical CPAP-initiation visit. The primary outcome variable for adherence was the average total minutes of CPAP usage across all days from the date that CPAP was initiated to 31 days later. Results: Unadjusted ordinary least-square regression showed a significant association between caregiver-reported self-efficacy and adherence (p = .007), indicating that mean daily CPAP usage increased by 48.4 minutes when caregiver-reported self-efficacy increased by one point (95% confidence interval 13.4-83.4 minutes). No other caregiver- or patient-reported cognitive health variables were related to CPAP use. Conclusions: This study indicates that caregiver CPAP-specific self-efficacy is an important factor to consider when starting youth on CPAP therapy for OSAS. Employing strategies to improve caregiver self-efficacy, beginning at CPAP initiation, may promote CPAP adherence.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".