Obstructive sleep apnoea

BMJ 1997;315:367 (9 August)

Letters

Obstructive sleep apnoea

False impression of objectivity may deny patients affordabletreatment

Editor–In their review of the clinical impact of obstructivesleep apnoea and the utility of treatment with nasal continuouspositive airways pressure John Wright and colleagues make some importantpoints but give a false impression of objectivity.¹

Their criteria for excluding abstracts and letters are vague,and the predetermined validity criteria for papers were notwell defined—disagreements between the two assessors had tobe resolved by a third person. There is evidence of bias, particularlyin the discussion on mortality. Two studies in which the designwould be unlikely to show any effect are highlighted as showingno significant association between obstructive sleep apnoeaand premature death² ³; another in which the apnoea index wasa predictor of excess mortality⁴ is only briefly mentioned andis qualified by the negative statements that the duration ofapnoea was not a predictor of . . . [Full text of this article]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike Add to Complore Complore Add to Connotea Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us Add to Digg Digg Add to Reddit Reddit Add to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon Add to Technorati Technorati What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

Sanders, M. H., Montserrat, J. M., Farre, R., Givelber, R. J. (2008). Positive Pressure Therapy: A Perspective on Evidence-based Outcomes and Methods of Application. Proc Am Thorac Soc 5: 161-172 [Abstract] [Full text]
Mar, J., Rueda, J.R., Duran-Cantolla, J., Schechter, C., Chilcott, J. (2003). The cost-effectiveness of nCPAP treatment in patients with moderate-to-severe obstructive sleep apnoea. Eur Respir J 21: 515-522 [Abstract] [Full text]