ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2025
Analysis of the reliability of a mobile phone application in craniofacial measurement for obstructive sleep apnea.
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) disrupts breathing due to upper airway obstruction during sleep. This study presents the development of a mobile application for 2D craniofacial measurements associated with OSA, aiming to provide an accessible approach.
methodsThis single-center, cross-sectional, retrospective analysis utilized data from 128 patients who underwent polysomnography and facial photography. Craniofacial measurements were obtained using the mobile app and standard desktop software (Studio 3
resultsThe application showed good reliability for key measurements, including profile angle (ICC = 0.86, p < 0.01), nasolabial angle (ICC = 0.84, p < 0.01), neck angle (ICC = 0.88, p < 0.01), facial height (ICC = 0.73, p < 0.01), and facial width (ICC = 0.75, p < 0.01), with significant F-tests. Bland-Altman analysis corroborated these results. However, upper lip length (ICC = 0.42, p > 0.05) and lower lip length (ICC = 0.54, p > 0.05) showed lower reliability and non-significant F-tests. The mentolabial sulcus (ICC = 0.51, p = 0.04) exhibited moderate reliability but higher variability.
conclusionThis mobile application shows promise as a reliable, accessible tool for OSA-related craniofacial assessment, especially useful in resource-limited settings. ICC and F-test values for primary measurements suggest the app's consistency with traditional methods, though the reduced reliability of lip length and mentolabial sulcus measurements may limit their clinical utility in individual assessments. Therefore, further refinements and validation in diverse populations are recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40459699What 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.