Cited by 147Obstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchSleep and related disordersTemporomandibular Joint Disorders

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 66 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea on Depressive Symptoms: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, and decreased quality of life. Treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or mandibular advancement devices (MADs) is effective for many symptoms of OSA. However, it remains controversial whether treatment with CPAP or MAD also improves depressive symptoms. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that examined the effect of CPAP or MADs on depressive symptoms in patients with OSA. We searched Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, and PsycINFO from the inception of the databases until August 15, 2014, for relevant articles. In a random effects meta-analysis of 19 identified trials, CPAP treatment resulted in an improvement in depressive symptoms compared to control, but with significant heterogeneity between trials (Q statistic, p<0.001; I(2) = 71.3%, 95% CI: 54%, 82%). CPAP treatment resulted in significantly greater improvement in depressive symptoms in the two trials with a higher burden of depression at baseline (meta-regression, p<0.001). The pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) in depressive symptoms with CPAP treatment in these two trial populations with baseline depression was 2.004 (95% CI: 1.387, 2.621), compared to 0.197 (95% CI: 0.059, 0.334) for 15 trials of populations without depression at baseline. Pooled estimates of the treatment effect of CPAP were greater in parallel arm trials than in crossover trials (meta-regression, p = 0.076). Random effects meta-analysis of five trials of MADs showed a significant improvement in depressive symptoms with MADs versus controls: SMD = 0.214 (95% CI: 0.026, 0.401) without significant heterogeneity (I(2) = 0%, 95% CI: 0%, 79%). Studies were limited by the use of depressive symptom scales that have not been validated specifically in people with OSA. CONCLUSIONS: CPAP and MADs may be useful components of treatment of depressive symptoms in individuals with OSA and depression. The efficacy of CPAP and MADs compared to standard therapies for depression is unknown. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001762

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 PRISMA flow diagram [12]. All medical databases were searched on the same date. Abstract, full-text review, and data extraction were conducted in duplicate by M. P. and C. E. B. APA, American Psychiatric Association; ATS, American Thoracic Society; APSS, Associated Professional Sleep Societies; CENTRAL, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials.
Figure 1 PRISMA flow diagram [12]. All medical databases were searched on the same date. Abstract, full-text review, and data extraction were conducted in duplicate by M. P. and C. E. B. APA, American Psychiatric Association; ATS, American Thoracic Society; APSS, Associated Professional Sleep Societies; CENTRAL, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 CPAP studies forest plot. Data were calculated by a random effects model. Studies were stratified by baseline depression score. Boxes are SMDs, and lines are 95% CIs. The vertical solid line represents no difference between CPAP and control. Values to the right of the solid line favor CPAP benefit. Pooled SMDs and 95% CIs are represented by the diamond shapes.
Figure 2 CPAP studies forest plot. Data were calculated by a random effects model. Studies were stratified by baseline depression score. Boxes are SMDs, and lines are 95% CIs. The vertical solid line represents no difference between CPAP and control. Values to the right of the solid line favor CPAP benefit. Pooled SMDs and 95% CIs are represented by the diamond shapes.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 MAD studies forest plot. Data were calculated by a random effects model. Boxes are SMDs, and lines are 95% CIs. The vertical solid line represents no difference between MAD and control. Values to the right of the solid line favor MAD benefit. Pooled SMD and 95% CI is represented by the diamond shape.
Figure 3 MAD studies forest plot. Data were calculated by a random effects model. Boxes are SMDs, and lines are 95% CIs. The vertical solid line represents no difference between MAD and control. Values to the right of the solid line favor MAD benefit. Pooled SMD and 95% CI is represented by the diamond shape.CC BY · PubMed Central

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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 67 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. S Redline, 1998, Improvement of mild sleep-disordered breathing with CPAP compared with conservative therapy, Am J Respir Crit Care Med, 157, 858, 10.1164/ajrccm.157.3.9709042 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–147 of 147

Metadata

Authors
Povitz, M., Bolo, C. E., Heitman, S. J., Tsai, W. H., Wang, J., & James, M. T.
Affiliations
  • Western University (CA)
  • University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
James, Matthew T.
Venue
PLoS Medicine
Published
2014-11-25
Volume
11
Issue
11
Pages
e1001762
ISSN
  • 1549-1277 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-1676
OpenAlex
W2096306751
Cited by
147
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 1
FWCI
1.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology (medical) › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Oral Surgery › Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
Keywords
obstructive sleep apnea, depressive symptoms, depression, continuous positive airway pressure, mandibular advancement device, sleep apnea treatment, quality of life, quality of life interventions, sleep-disordered breathing, sleep apnea comorbidity
MeSH terms
Depression, Humans, Quality of Life, Mandibular Advancement, Sleep Apnea, Obstructive, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure

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