Question · asked by 1 review
Oral appliance or functional orthopaedic appliance vs placebo or no treatment: Reduction of snoring
- Population
- Children with obstructive sleep apnoea (aged 15 years or younger)
- Intervention
- Oral appliance or functional orthopaedic appliance
- Comparison
- placebo or no treatment
- Outcome
- Reduction of snoring
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Oral appliance or functional orthopaedic appliance vs Placebo or no treatment Reduction of snoring (polysomnography) · Children with obstructive sleep apnoea (aged 15 years or younger) The review found no eligible studies for this question. Oral appliances and functional orthopaedic appliances for obstructive sleep apnoea in children (2016) · Cochrane All outcomes | The included study did not assess this outcome. | 0 studies | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oral appliances and functional orthopaedic appliances for obstructive sleep apnoea in children 2016 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2016-04 | Not listed | Not assessed |
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.