MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Positive Airway Pressure Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea–Hypopnea in Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy: A Pilot Randomized Proof-of-Concept Clinical Trial

2024· article· en· W4391100860 on OpenAlexafffund
Pattaraporn Panyarath, Noa Goldscher, Sushmita Pamidi, Stella S. Daskalopoulou, Robert Gagnon, Natalie Dayan, K. Raiche, Allen Olha, Sarayut Lucien Geater, Andrea Benedetti, R. John Kimoff

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the American Thoracic Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreCentre for Advancing Health Outcomes
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPrince of Songkla UniversityFaculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla UniversityResMed
KeywordsMedicineObstructive sleep apneaPositive airway pressureRandomized controlled trialPopulationContinuous positive airway pressurePregnancyObstetricsArterial stiffnessBlood pressureHypopneaPhysical therapyInternal medicinePolysomnographyApnea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rationale Maternal obstructive sleep apnea–hypopnea (OSAH) is associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP). OSAH treatment with positive airway pressure (PAP) in the general population lowers blood pressure (BP). However, there are limited data on the effects of PAP therapy in maternal OSAH. Objectives Our primary objective was to assess the feasibility of recruitment to a pilot randomized trial and adherence to PAP therapy for OSAH in women with HDP. Secondary objectives included assessment of PAP effects on 24-h BP, arterial stiffness, and maternal and fetal outcomes. Methods Women with singleton pregnancies at ⩾12 weeks’ gestation and hypertension underwent home level 2 polysomnography; those with mild to moderate OSAH (apnea–hypopnea index ⩾ 5 events/h; women with severe OSAH with apnea–hypopnea index > 30 events/h and oxygen desaturation index > 30 were excluded) were randomized to either PAP or nasal dilator strip (NDS; control) therapy. After PAP education, adherence was monitored online with episodic phone or in-person support by research personnel. Twenty-four-hour BP and arterial stiffness were assessed at baseline and before delivery. Maternal and fetal outcomes were also recorded. Results Of 105 potentially eligible participants, 67 agreed to undergo screening for OSAH over 38 months; 48 women meeting OSAH inclusion criteria were randomized to PAP (n = 27) or NDS (n = 21) therapy. Of these, 14 PAP (52%) and 13 NDS (62%) participants completed all predelivery measurements, with lack of completion due to urgent delivery (19% in the PAP group, 14% in the NDS group), PAP intolerance at initiation (19%), or other factors. Mean PAP use was 3.1 ± 2.5 h/night, with use ⩾4 h/night on 38.4 ± 33.7% of nights during 9.6 ± 4.0 weeks of treatment. BP was controlled within the target range in most participants. There were no differences in mean change in 24-hour BP or arterial stiffness measurements or in adverse maternal and fetal outcomes between the PAP and NDS groups in either intention-to-treat or per-protocol analyses. Conclusions PAP adherence was suboptimal in this HDP cohort despite education and troubleshooting. Further work is required to identify optimal OSAH treatment strategies during pregnancy. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03309826).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.420
Teacher spread0.332 · 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
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the American Thoracic SocietySame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207