ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2022
Patient preferences in obstructive sleep apnea-a discrete choice experiment.
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- What do patients want for their sleep apnea? A systematic review of treatment choice and preference drivers.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2026Pooled it
- The Evolving Landscape of Discrete Choice Experiments in Health Economics: A Systematic Review.PharmacoEconomics · 2025Pooled it
- Patient-reported outcomes with hypoglossal nerve stimulation for treatment of obstructive sleep apnea: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Patient-reported experience with hypoglossal nerve stimulation in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea.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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is one of the most common chronic sleep disorders, which can be treated by different interventions. It is known that acceptance and adherence to these therapies is influenced by a variety of factors. However, there is a limited understanding of patient preferences and decision-making in the context of OSA treatment.
methodsA discrete choice experiment was conducted on patients with OSA recruited from a tertiary sleep center to evaluate preferences for different treatment attributes. Participants received four different choice tasks with three hypothetical treatments, each defined by seven attributes. A random-effects logit model was used to estimate the influence of the different attributes on the choice decisions. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was carried out to evaluate interactions with medical variables.
resultsIn a cohort of 241 subjects with OSA, preferences for treatment attributes and utilities derived from them differed. Most relevant attributes were Reduction in risk of comorbidities, Improvements of daytime sleepiness, Requirement for surgery, and Occurrence of treatment-related side effects. Demographic or medical variables, such as age, gender, or apnea-hypopnea index, did not influence the choice decision. Multivariate logistic regression revealed significant differences in preferences depending on OSA disease history (p = .025) and presence of OSA symptoms (p = .033).
conclusionsThe study identified preferences for attributes of OSA and their utilities from a patient perspective. Relevant differences of preferences in subgroups of patients with OSA were identified, which may be important to consider in selecting appropriate treatments that lead to high rates of acceptance and adherence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35001351What 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.