Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 297

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Objective measurement of compliance during oral appliance therapy for sleep-disordered breathing

Open access
Vanderveken, Olivier M, Dieltjens, Marijke, Wouters, Kristien, De Backer, Wilfried A, Van de Heyning, Paul H, Braem, Marc J·2013·Thorax

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Oral appliance (OA) therapy is increasingly prescribed as a non-continuous positive airway pressure treatment modality for sleep-disordered breathing (SDB). Although OA therapy is reported to be efficacious for the treatment of SDB, data on compliance remain limited to self-report. METHODS: In this 3-month prospective clinical trial, the main outcome was to assess the safety and feasibility of an objective measurement of compliance during OA therapy using an embedded microsensor thermometer with on-chip integrated readout electronics in 51 consecutive patients with an established diagnosis of SDB (AHI 18.0 ± 11.9/h; age 47 ± 10 y; BMI 26.6 ± 4.0 kg/m(2); men/women: 31/20). Patients were unaware of the purpose of the study. RESULTS: No microsensor-related adverse events were recorded. In addition, no problems were encountered during the readout of the compliance data. Out of 51 microsensors, one had a technical defect and was lost to follow-up. In this study, the overall objective mean rate of OA use was 6.6 ± 1.3 h per day with a regular OA users' rate of 82% at the 3-month follow-up. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between objective and self-reported OA compliance data in this study. Measurement of the objective OA compliance allowed us to calculate the mean disease alleviation (MDA) as the product of objective compliance and therapeutic efficacy. MDA serves as a measure of the overall therapeutic effectiveness, and turned out to be 51.1%. CONCLUSIONS: The results illustrate the safety and feasibility of objective measurement of OA compliance. The objective measurement of OA compliance allows for calculation of the MDA.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2012-201900

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 11 references

Cited by

See all 297

Metadata

Authors
Vanderveken, O. M., Dieltjens, M., Wouters, K., De Backer, W. A., Van de Heyning, P. H., & Braem, M. J.
Venue
Thorax
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2012-09-19
Volume
68
Issue
1
Pages
91-96
ISSN
  • 0040-6376 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3296
OpenAlex
W2129935477
Cited by
297
References
11
FWCI
20.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Objective measurement of compliance during oral appliance therapy for sleep-disordered breathing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2012-201900
The paper
Vanderveken, O. M., Dieltjens, M., Wouters, K., De Backer, W. A., Van de Heyning, P. H., & Braem, M. J. (2013). Objective measurement of compliance during oral appliance therapy for sleep-disordered breathing. Thorax. https://doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2012-201900

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.