MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982728721 · doi:10.1207/s15402010bsm0403_4

Clinical Management of Insomnia Using Cognitive Therapy

2006· review· en· W1982728721 on OpenAlexafffund
Lynda Bélanger, Josée Savard, Charles M. Morin

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Sleep Medicine · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthHealth CanadaNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsInsomniaCognitionChronic insomniaMedicinePsychotherapistPsychologyPsychiatrySleep disorder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cognitive therapy has been shown effective in the treatment of several psychological and health-related disorders. It is also increasingly used in the management of insomnia. This article outlines some principles and applications of this therapeutic approach as adapted to the treatment of insomnia. Based on Beck's model, this psychotherapeutic approach seeks to modify sleep-related dysfunctional beliefs and thoughts and maladaptive cognitive processes involved in the exacerbation and perpetuation of insomnia. This is accomplished through the use of several cognitive restructuring procedures. After outlining a conceptual model of insomnia, which emphasizes the mediating role of dysfunctional cognitions in the development and maintenance of chronic insomnia, the rationale and general principles of cognitive therapy for insomnia are presented, followed by a description of the treatment procedures, clinical case illustrations, and practical implementation issues. Future directions include the need to refine cognitive interventions and to examine the unique contribution of this therapeutic component to the overall efficacy of multifaceted cognitive-behavioral therapy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.257
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations81
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavioral Sleep MedicineSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207