ReviewSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2021
Are the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) domains considered in the obstructive sleep apnea instruments? An integrative review.
Review in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- What Do Patient-Reported Sleep Measures Assess? A Content Analysis.Journal of sleep research · 2026Pooled it
- Integrative Physiotherapy Approaches for Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction: Efficacy of Ultrasound, Ventral Glide Mobilization, and Lumbopelvic Rotation Mobilization.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025Article
- Use of the biopsychosocial model of functioning in physiotherapeutic evaluation of patients with obstructive sleep apnea: a survey-based study.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2025Article
- Could an increased risk of obstructive sleep apnoea be one of the determinants associated with disability in individuals with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases?Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeObstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) is related to cardiovascular, metabolic, and neurocognitive diseases. Furthermore, OSA symptoms, such as excessive sleepiness, fatigue, and mood disorders, may interfere in functioning. The assessment of this aspect in patients with OSA is not frequent and no specific instrument is available in the literature. Our aim is to identify if the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) domains are considered in the validated instruments used to assess patients with OSA.
methodsIn this integrative literature review, three databases were searched: Pubmed, Embase, and LILACS. Bibliographic survey was carried out in 2020, between March and July. Articles published in English, Portuguese, and Spanish with validated tools to assess OSA in adults were included.
resultsThirty instruments have undergone a process of concept extraction and coding according to the ICF, generating a total of 769 significant concepts. It was observed that the function domain was the most prevalent, making 42% (n = 323) of the concepts, followed by domains of activity (16%), participation (10%), environmental factors (5%), personal factor (5%), and structure (1%). Only one instrument, the "Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index (SAQLI)," encompasses all domains of the ICF in its constructs.
conclusionIn the analyzed instruments, the function domain prevails, with most concepts related to sleep functions. Only one validated instrument included in this research covered all the ICF domains. This instrument closely matched the recommended way of assessing functioning, though it approached the domains in an unbalanced way.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32865728What 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.