SynthesisSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2026
Health-related quality of life in patients with obstructive sleep apnea - a systematic review update assessing the quality of measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures.
Synthesis in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this systematic review update was to identify existing health-related quality of life (HRQOL) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Building upon a 2016 systematic review, which recommended four PROMs with the highest evidence, this investigation was warranted to synthesize new evidence and evaluate new PROMs that have emerged since then via the Consensus based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN).
methodsWe searched Medline via PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library for HRQOL PROM development and validation studies published in English or German. Studies focusing on cross-cultural validation, those in which PROMs were assessed as secondary outcomes, and studies limited to specific demographic subgroups or single HRQOL domains were excluded. For risk of bias and quality of measurement properties (MP) assessment, we used the COSMIN methodology to facilitate comparability with the previous review, as well as the GRADE approach for evidence level evaluation.
resultsWe identified two new PROMs, the Patient-Reported Apnea Questionnaire (PRAQ) and the Symptoms, Tiredness, Alertness, Mood and Psychosocial instrument (STAMP), which were validated in two studies and a single study, respectively. Overall, the PRAQ displays an moderate risk of bias with excellent quality of MP and high evidence for content validity in particular, whereas the STAMP shows a higher risk of bias and low quality of MP.
conclusionThe PRAQ has demonstrated the strongest evidence among PROMs since 2016. In total, including the previous review, five PROMs are currently recommended for assessing HRQOL in individuals with OSA. REVIEW REGISTRATION: The review was registered with PROSPERO under the registration number CRD42024602020.
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.