Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27878543›Full record

Trial reportSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2017

A new predictive model for continuous positive airway pressure in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea.

Matthew R Ebben, Mariya Narizhnaya, Ana C Krieger

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled TrialValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07376343 (Comparative Study of CPAP Predictive Equations and In-laboratory Manual Titration in Thai Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07376343 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Comparative Study of CPAP Predictive Equations and In-laboratory Manual Titration in Thai Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea

TypeobservationalSponsorThammasat UniversityRan2026 to 2026Enrolled150ConditionsOSA - Obstructive Sleep ApneaArmsSleep test, Predictive equations of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. International Consensus Statement on Obstructive Sleep Apnea.International forum of allergy & rhinology · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matthew R EbbenDepartment of Neurology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. mae2001@med.cornell.edu.
Mariya NarizhnayaDepartment of Neurology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Ana C KriegerDepartment of Neurology, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA.
Cornell University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNumerous mathematical formulas have been developed to determine continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) without an in-laboratory titration study. Recent studies have shown that style of CPAP mask can affect the optimal pressure requirement. However, none of the current models take mask style into account. Therefore, the goal of this study was to develop new predictive models of CPAP that take into account the style of mask interface.

methodsData from 200 subjects with attended CPAP titrations during overnight polysomnograms using nasal masks and 132 subjects using oronasal masks were randomized and split into either a model development or validation group. Predictive models were then created in each model development group and the accuracy of the models was then tested in the model validation groups.

resultsThe correlation between our new oronasal model and laboratory determined optimal CPAP was significant, r = 0.61, p < 0.001. Our nasal formula was also significantly related to laboratory determined optimal CPAP, r = 0.35, p < 0.001. The oronasal model created in our study significantly outperformed the original CPAP predictive model developed by Miljeteig and Hoffstein, z = 1.99, p < 0.05. The predictive performance of our new nasal model did not differ significantly from Miljeteig and Hoffstein's original model, z = -0.16, p < 0.90. The best predictors for the nasal mask group were AHI, lowest SaO2, and neck size, whereas the top predictors in the oronasal group were AHI and lowest SaO2.

conclusionOur data show that predictive models of CPAP that take into account mask style can significantly improve the formula's accuracy. Most of the past models likely focused on model development with nasal masks (mask style used for model development was not typically reported in previous investigations) and are not well suited for patients using an oronasal interface. Our new oronasal CPAP prediction equation produced significantly improved performance compared to the well-known Miljeteig and Hoffstein formula in patients titrated on CPAP with an oronasal mask and was also significantly related to laboratory determined optimal CPAP.

Indexed as

MasksModels, TheoreticalAdultAgedContinuous Positive Airway PressureEquipment DesignFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOxygenPolysomnographySleep Apnea, ObstructiveTreatment OutcomeOxygenContinuous positive airway pressureMask interfaceObstructive sleep apneaPredictive model

Identifiers

PMID27878543
OpenAlexW2550391834

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.