SynthesisBMC pulmonary medicine2026
Individualized treatment selection for obstructive sleep apnea: network meta-analysis focusing on position dependent patients.
Synthesis in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) affects nearly 1 billion adults worldwide. Treatment options include positive airway pressure (PAP), oral appliance therapy, and positional therapy. Few studies have comprehensively compared these treatments using network meta-analysis. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of different non-surgical OSA treatments across several clinically relevant outcomes.
methodsA systematic review and network meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov through October 2025. Randomized controlled trials comparing PAP therapy, oral appliance therapy, positional therapy, or control in adults with OSA were included. Primary outcomes were AHI reduction and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) improvement. Secondary outcomes included oxygen saturation. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed, with treatment rankings using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).
resultsEighteen trials involving 1,520 participants were included. For AHI reduction, PAP therapy was most effective (mean difference: -17.39 events/hour, 95% CI: -23.13 to -12.74), followed by oral appliance therapy (-10.76 events/hour) and positional therapy (-10.05 events/hour). PAP therapy ranked first with 100% probability, while oral appliance therapy and positional therapy showed similar effectiveness. For ESS improvement, PAP showed slight superiority. In position-dependent OSA, oral appliance therapy ranked first with 40% probability. Moderate heterogeneity was found (I² = 32–52%).
conclusionsPAP therapy is the most effective treatment for OSA, while oral appliance and positional therapies offer viable alternatives, especially for position-dependent OSA patients. However, moderate heterogeneity (I² = 32–52%) was observed across analyses, which may affect the certainty of these conclusions. Treatment selection should consider patient-specific factors, and findings should be interpreted acknowledging this methodological limitation.
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.