UPDATE: a version of this has been accepted for publication as a letter to the editor in the medical journal Laryngoscope.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are supposed to be high-quality reviews of the medical literature that represent the highest level of scientific evaluation and evidence. Unfortunately, all that glitters in not gold. I have written previously about the fact that:

Nevertheless, we continue to see publications of systematic reviews and meta-analyses that give the impression that oral myofunctional therapy is a valid approach. It is not proven, as there is virtually no scientific evidence. What authors have done is combine results of single studies of very-different exercise-based programs that do NOT represent oral myofunctional therapy. This is not correct scientifically and not appropriate for patients suffering from obstructive sleep apnea, a potentially-serious medical disorder that also can affect daytime functioning and quality of life.

As I have said before, we can and must do better than publishing sloppy science – and allowing patients and providers to come away with false impressions.


Leave a Reply

71 − 62 =

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.