Effects of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure on Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is associated with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the first-line therapy for OSA. However, the effect of CPAP on NAFLD in patients with concomitant OSA is still unclear. This study aims to identify the use of CPAP on NAFLD in patients with OSA. Method: A systematic literature search was performed using particular keywords and medical subheadings in three journal databases: Cochrane, PubMed, and EBSCOhost. The results were screened and assessed using inclusion and exclusion criteria by three independent authors. The Randomized controlled trial (RCT) quality was evaluated with Jadad scale and the cohort studies quality was assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale.Results: Two RCTs and three cohort studies were eligible to fulfil the inclusion criteria, consisting of 620 total patients. Two RCTs showed no statistically significant improvement after CPAP treatment in NAFLD based on intrahepatic triglyceride (measured by proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy), liver stiffness measurement, serum cytokeratin-18 fragment, and liver function blood test parameters. Meanwhile, 2 cohort studies in adults and 1 cohort study in children showed significant improvement in ALT, AST, and APRI. However, one cohort study showed no significant improvement in serum fibrosis markers and transient elastography measurement after CPAP treatment.Conclusion: CPAP might be beneficial in some patients with OSA to improve NAFLD, but further research that includes many subjects and longer duration of CPAP therapy is needed to confirm this result.
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 | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".