MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020888729 · doi:10.5665/sleep.1878

Dismantling Multicomponent Behavioral Treatment for Insomnia in Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2012· article· en· W2020888729 on OpenAlexaff
Dana R. Epstein, Souraya Sidani, Richard R. Bootzin, Michael Belyea

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNational Institute of Nursing ResearchNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
KeywordsInsomniaRandomized controlled trialMedicineIntervention (counseling)Physical therapyChronic insomniaSleep disorderClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Recently, the use of multicomponent insomnia treatment has increased. This study compares the effect of single component and multicomponent behavioral treatments for insomnia in older adults after intervention and at 3 months and 1 yr posttreatment. DESIGN: A randomized, controlled study. SETTING: Veterans Affairs medical center. PARTICIPANTS: 179 older adults (mean age, 68.9 yr ± 8.0; 115 women [64.2%]) with chronic primary insomnia. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomly assigned to 6 wk of stimulus control therapy (SCT), sleep restriction therapy (SRT), the 2 therapies combined into a multicomponent intervention (MCI), or a wait-list control group. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Primary outcomes were subjective (daily sleep diary) and objective (actigraphy) measures of sleep-onset latency (SOL), wake after sleep onset (WASO), total sleep time (TST), time in bed (TIB), and sleep efficiency (SE). Secondary outcomes were clinical measures including response and remission rates. There were no differences between the single and multicomponent interventions on primary sleep outcomes measured by diary and actigraphy. All treatments produced significant improvement in diary-reported sleep in comparison with the control group. Effect sizes for sleep diary outcomes were medium to large. Treatment gains were maintained at follow-up for diary and actigraph measured SOL, WASO, and SE. The MCI group had the largest proportion of treatment remitters. CONCLUSIONS: For older adults with chronic primary insomnia, the findings provide initial evidence that SCT, SRT, and MCI are equally efficacious and produce sustainable treatment gains on diary, actigraphy, and clinical outcomes. From a clinical perspective, MCI may be a preferred treatment due to its higher remission rate. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: Behavioral Intervention for Insomnia in Older Adults. NCT01154023. URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01154023?term=Behavioral+Intervention+for+Insomnia+in+Older+Adults&rank=1.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations126
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207