MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385648203 · doi:10.2196/47460

Obstructive Sleep Apnea and a Comprehensive Remotely Supervised Rehabilitation Program: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4385648203 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jakub Hnatiak, Lujza Zikmund Galkova, Petr Winnige, Ladislav Baťalík, Filip Dosbaba, Ondřej Ludka, Jan Krejčí

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstructive sleep apneaContinuous positive airway pressurePhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialRehabilitationPolysomnographyQuality of life (healthcare)Positive airway pressureApnea–hypopnea indexPsychological interventionApneaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is characterized by recurrent, intermittent partial or complete obstruction of the upper respiratory tract during sleep, which negatively affects the patient's daily quality of life (QoL). Middle-aged and older men who smoke and have obesity are most at risk. Even though the use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) during sleep remains the gold standard treatment, various rehabilitation methods, such as exercise, respiratory therapy, myofunctional therapy, and nutritional lifestyle interventions, also appear to be effective. Moreover, it is increasingly recommended to use alternative or additional therapy options in combination with CPAP therapy. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate if a comprehensive home-based, remotely supervised rehabilitation program (tele-RHB), in combination with standard therapy, can improve OSA severity by decreasing the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI); improve objective parameters of polysomnographic, spirometric, anthropometric, and body composition examinations; improve lipid profile, maximal mouth pressure, and functional capacity tests; and enhance the subjective perception of QoL, as well as daytime sleepiness in male participants with moderate to severe OSA. Our hypothesis is that a combination of the tele-RHB program and CPAP therapy will be more effective by improving OSA severity and the abovementioned parameters. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial aims to recruit 50 male participants between the ages of 30 and 60 years with newly diagnosed moderate to severe OSA. Participants will be randomized 1:1, either to a 12-week tele-RHB program along with CPAP therapy or to CPAP therapy alone. After the completion of the intervention, the participants will be invited to complete a 1-year follow-up. The primary outcomes will be the polysomnographic value of AHI, Epworth Sleepiness Scale score, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) score, percentage of body fat, 6-minute walk test distance covered, as well as maximal inspiratory and expiratory mouth pressure values. Secondary outcomes will include polysomnographic values of oxygen desaturation index, supine AHI, total sleep time, average heart rate, mean oxygen saturation, and the percentage of time with oxygen saturation below 90%; anthropometric measurements of neck, waist, and hip circumference; BMI values; forced vital capacity; forced expiratory volume in 1 second; World Health Organization's tool to measure QoL (WHOQOL-BREF) score; and lipid profile values. RESULTS: Study recruitment began on October 25, 2021, and the estimated study completion date is December 2024. Analyses will be performed to examine whether the combination of the tele-RHB program and CPAP therapy will be more effective in the reduction of OSA severity and improvement of QoL, body composition and circumferences, exercise tolerance, lipid profile, as well as respiratory muscle and lung function, compared to CPAP therapy alone. CONCLUSIONS: The study will evaluate the effect of a comprehensive tele-RHB program on selected parameters mentioned above in male participants. The results of this intervention could help the further development of novel additional therapeutic home-based options for OSA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04759456; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04759456. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/47460.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.006
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0750.009

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207