Effects of nocturnal wearing of dentures on the quality of sleep and oral-health-related quality in edentate elders with untreated sleep apnea: a randomized cross-over trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess whether the nocturnal wear of dentures has an effect on the quality of sleep and oral-health-related quality of life of the edentulous elderly with untreated sleep apnea. METHODS: A single-blind randomized cross-over design with two sequences and two periods was used. Participants (n = 77) were randomly assigned either to sequence 1 (nocturnal wear followed by nocturnal nonwear of the denture for 30-30 days) or sequence 2 (nocturnal nonwear followed by nocturnal wear of denture for 30-30 days). The primary sleep outcome was the quality of sleep, assessed through sleep fragmentation measured as Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) and respiratory arousal from portable polysomnography. Secondary outcomes were daytime sleepiness, sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, PSQI) and oral-health-related quality of life measured by validated questionnaires. RESULTS: The mean paired difference in AHI scores for the period of wearing versus not wearing dentures at night was small 1.0 event per hour (p = 0.50; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -2.0 to 4.1). The mean respiratory arousal index was higher when wearing dentures at night than when not wearing dentures at night, with a mean paired difference of 2.3 events per hour (p = 0.05; 95% CI = 0.0 to 4.6). No difference in sleepiness and PSQI were noted. Wearing dentures at night resulted in a statistically significantly higher mean score of psychological discomfort when compared to not wearing dentures at night. CONCLUSIONS: The results provide some support to usual practice guidelines to remove dentures at night in edentulous elders suffering from sleep apnea. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: 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 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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".