ReviewSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2015
Mandibular advancement splint (MAS) therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea--an overview and quality assessment of systematic reviews.
Review in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews on the Efficacy of Oral Appliance Therapy for Adult and Pediatric Sleep-Disordered Breathing.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2016Pooled it
- Use of bibloc and monobloc oral appliances in obstructive sleep apnoea: a multicentre, randomized, blinded, parallel-group equivalence trial.European journal of orthodontics · 2019Trial
- Obstructive sleep apnea treated with custom-made bibloc and monobloc oral appliances: a retrospective comparative study.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2017Trial
- Ready-Made Versus Custom-Made Mandibular Repositioning Devices in Sleep Apnea: A Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2017Trial
- The Global Socioeconomic Burden of Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Comprehensive Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo conduct an overview of existing systematic reviews concerning management of obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea syndrome (OSAHS) with mandibular advancement splint (MAS) and assess their methodological quality.
methodPubMed and relevant Cochrane Library databases (CDSR, DARE, HTA) searches were performed (09.13) to identify systematic reviews investigating the response of adults with OSAHS to MAS therapy. The methodological quality of the included systematic reviews was assessed using AMSTAR, a validated tool for assessing quality.
resultsEight systematic reviews, four incorporating meta-analyses, were identified evaluating both objective and subjective outcome measures. The effectiveness of MAS therapy was compared to no treatment (n = 1), non-active appliance (n = 6), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP; n = 5), surgical intervention (n = 3) and a different MAS intervention (n = 4). The quality of the reviews was variable (median = 7, range = 3 to 11), with only two of higher quality (AMSTAR scores >10), one of them a Cochrane review. In this high quality and current review, the overall (pooled) effects for comparison of MAS therapy with inactive appliances, revealed significant benefits of MAS therapy in terms of both daytime sleepiness and objective apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) outcomes.
conclusionIn general, the results from the higher quality reviews concerning the effectiveness of MAS therapy for OSAHS highlight the ability of the intervention to improve OSAHS. Current reporting guidelines for systematic reviews (e.g. PRISMA) and sources of high-quality existing reviews should be closely followed to enhance the validity and relevance of future reviews.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.