ArticleERJ open research2025
Treatment choice in mild to moderate sleep apnoea in the European Sleep Apnea Database.
Article in ERJ open research, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA), positive airway pressure (PAP) and mandibular advancement devices (MADs) are recommended treatments according to guidelines. This cross-sectional study aimed to determine the clinical and organisational predictors for treatment recommendations in mild to moderate OSA. Methods: In the European Sleep Apnea Database, factors predicting the choice of MAD or PAP treatment were determined in patients with newly diagnosed mild to moderate OSA. Accessibility and reimbursement of MADs study sites was obtained Results: 6618 (65.5%) patients received PAP and 3491 (34.5%) were recommended MADs. MAD recommendations varied between centres (0% to 76%). Significant factors favouring MADs include mild Conclusion: In mild to moderate OSA, MADs are less frequently recommended than PAP, particularly amongst patients with a higher disease burden. MADs were more frequently used when they were more accessible and reimbursed. Thus, MADs are likely an underused treatment in mild to moderate OSA.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.