MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Positional Therapy for the Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Children: A Qualitative Study

2025· article· en· W4410273419 on OpenAlexaff
Lena Xiao, Katherine Sánchez, Sujit Sheth, I. Narang

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstructive sleep apneaQualitative researchSleep apneaPediatricsApneaIntensive care medicinePhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Positional obstructive sleep apnea (POSA) is a form of obstructive sleep apnea where airway obstruction is exacerbated during supine sleep. Treatments for POSA include adenotonsillectomy, positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy, and positional therapy, an emerging treatment with an inflatable belt that physically prevents supine sleep. To date, little is known about the experiences of children and their caregivers with POSA treatment. Objective: This study aims to explore (1) the experiences and perspectives of children and caregivers on positional therapy and (2) their preferences for POSA treatment. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with the caregivers of children with POSA aged 4-18 years old who participated in a randomised controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of positional therapy. Children were also invited to join the interviews. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded by two independent reviewers using thematic analysis. Overarching themes were generated collaboratively. Results: Fifteen caregivers were interviewed including 5 caregiver-child dyads. The 15 children had a median age of 10.8 years (interquartile range 9.3, 16.1 years) at the time of the interview. Eight of 15 children (53%) were female, and 5/15 children (33%) had a previous adenotonsillectomy prior to entry into the trial. Emerging themes included: (1) comfort and convenience, (2) symptom improvement, (3) emotional, psychological, and social aspects of treatment, (4) shared decision-making, and (5) reaction to treatment options. Some participants preferred adenotonsillectomy due to its curative potential, but it was viewed as a last resort by others due to the risk of trauma and complications. While positional therapy was considered the least invasive, it had modest effects on sleep apnea symptoms. PAP therapy provided greater symptom relief and was seen as an alternative to adenotonsillectomy. However, barriers to PAP therapy included discomfort with therapy and the need for nightly implementation. Discussion: Values and priorities for the outcome of POSA treatment vary between families. These should be identified during initial consultations with healthcare providers to ensure satisfaction with treatment. To optimize adherence to PAP therapy and positional therapy in pediatric populations, sensory issues should be addressed, and the setup and maintenance process should be simplified.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.380 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine→Same topicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research→French-language works237,207→