Question · asked by 1 review
PAP therapy vs usual care: QoL
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
PAP therapy vs usual care QOL · heart failure associated with central sleep apnoea Positive airway pressure therapy for the treatment of central sleep apnoea associated with heart failure (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 1617 participants | Low |
PAP therapy vs usual care QOL: Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) (points) scale from 0 to 105 · heart failure associated with central sleep apnoea Positive airway pressure therapy for the treatment of central sleep apnoea associated with heart failure (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 1458 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Positive airway pressure therapy for the treatment of central sleep apnoea associated with heart failure 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.