Observational studySleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2020
Indication of CPAP without a sleep study in patients with high pretest probability of obstructive sleep apnea.
Observational study in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Symptom content analysis of OSA questionnaires: time to identify and improve relevance of diversity of OSA symptoms?Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2024Article
- The Automatic Algorithm of the Auto-CPAP Device as a Tool for the Assessment of the Treatment Efficacy of CPAP in Patients with Moderate and Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Using clinical data to predict obstructive sleep apnea.Journal of thoracic disease · 2022Article
- Guidelines of the Indian Society for Sleep Research (ISSR) for Practice of Sleep Medicine during COVID-19.Sleep and vigilance · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the performance of clinical criteria (CC) for diagnosis and initiation of empirical treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in patients with suspected obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) compared with the treatment decision based on sleep studies (polysomnography or respiratory polygraphy), guidelines, and experience of participating physicians.
methodsThis was a simulated intention-to-treat study in a retrospective (G1) and prospective (G2) cohort. Four observers (two per group) called CC1 and CC2 reviewed the sleep questionnaires and indicated CPAP if the patients presented snoring, frequent apneas (≥ 3-4/week), body mass index (BMI) > 25 kg/m
resultsA total of 653 patients (264 women, 40%) were studied. Median age was 54 years, BMI 28 kg/m
conclusionCPAP indication without a previous sleep study showed a low sensitivity (≅ 22%) but a specificity greater than 95% in patients with high pretest probability for OSA (snoring, report of frequent apneas, BMI > 25 kg/m
Indexed as
Identifiers
31720981What 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.