Adherence to CPAP Therapy in Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Prospective Study on Quality of Life and Determinants of Use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) often goes unrecognized despite common symptoms, such as excessive daytime sleepiness, fatigue, and impaired quality of life (QoL). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the gold standard treatment for OSA, but optimal daily usage and time needed for observable effects remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the short-term effects of CPAP on daytime sleepiness and QoL in patients with severe OSA. Medical records were collected from 87 patients with severe OSA who initiated CPAP therapy. Also, validated questionnaires were used before and after one month of CPAP to analyze QoL-the Calgary Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index (SAQLI), the Cues to CPAP Use Questionnaire (CCUQ), and daytime sleepiness-the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). Multiple regression analysis was conducted to identify predictors of CPAP usage. Of the total participants aged 55.6 ± 12.5, 77% were males, and 62% were CPAP adherent. Reductions in daytime sleepiness (ESS) were noted, as well as improvements in both overall QoL (SAQLI) and specifically in the domains of daily functioning, social interactions, emotional well-being, and symptom perception. Important cues for CPAP usage recognized by patients were physicians' instructions and physicians' concern regarding their patients' condition. Furthermore, multiple regression revealed higher SAQLI scores and lower ESS scores as positive predictors of CPAP usage, along with lower AHI after one month of CPAP being associated with sufficient 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".