ReviewCureus2026
Clinical Effectiveness of Nasal Dilators in Sleep-Disordered Breathing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Subjective and Objective Evaluation of a Novel Nasal Tip Elevating Strip for Nasal Obstruction: A Pilot Study.Cureus · 2026Article
- Sleep-Disordered Breathing and Nocturnal Hypoxia in Cancer Patients: A Stomatological and Airway Assessment Framework.Nature and science of sleep · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNasal dilators are widely used as a noninvasive intervention for snoring and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), yet their objective effects on sleep-disordered breathing and polysomnographic outcomes remain uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to assess the effectiveness of nasal dilators in managing sleep-disordered breathing.
methodsScopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and ProQuest were systematically searched from inception to January 2024 for studies assessing the efficacy of internal or external nasal dilators in adult patients with sleep-disordered breathing. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to pool and compare the findings across studies using a random-effects model.
conclusionsNasal dilators cannot be recommended as monotherapy for sleep-disordered breathing. However, it may be helpful as adjunctive therapy in specific populations with mild symptoms or nasal congestion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.