MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048458454 · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.682

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Singly and Combined With Medication, for Persistent Insomnia

2009· article· en· W2048458454 on OpenAlexaffabout
Charles M. Morin, Annie Vallières, Bernard Guay, Hans Ivers, Josée Savard, Chantal Mérette, Célyne Bastien, Lucie Baillargeon

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de QuébecHôtel-Dieu de QuébecUniversité Laval
FundersNational Institute of Mental HealthH. Lundbeck A/SSanofi
KeywordsZolpidemMedicineInsomniaSleep onset latencyBedtimeCognitive behavioral therapyRandomized controlled trialHypnoticSleep onsetPhysical therapyInternal medicineAnesthesiaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and hypnotic medications are efficacious for short-term treatment of insomnia, but few patients achieve complete remission with any single treatment. It is unclear whether combined or maintenance therapies would enhance outcome. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the added value of medication over CBT alone for acute treatment of insomnia and the effects of maintenance therapies on long-term outcome. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Prospective, randomized controlled trial involving 2-stage therapy for 160 adults with persistent insomnia treated at a university hospital sleep center in Canada between January 2002 and April 2005. INTERVENTIONS: Participants received CBT alone or CBT plus 10 mg/d (taken at bedtime) of zolpidem for an initial 6-week therapy, followed by extended 6-month therapy. Patients initially treated with CBT attended monthly maintenance CBT for 6 months or received no additional treatment and those initially treated with combined therapy (CBT plus 10 mg/d of zolpidem) continued with CBT plus intermittent use of zolpidem or CBT only. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sleep onset latency, time awake after sleep onset, total sleep time, and sleep efficiency derived from daily diaries (primary outcomes); treatment response and remission rates derived from the Insomnia Severity Index (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: Cognitive behavioral therapy used singly or in combination with zolpidem produced significant improvements in sleep latency, time awake after sleep onset, and sleep efficiency during initial therapy (all P<.001); a larger increase of sleep time was obtained with the combined approach (P = .04). Both CBT alone and CBT plus zolpidem produced similar rates of treatment responders (60% [45/75] vs 61% [45/74], respectively; P = .84) and treatment remissions (39% [29/75] vs 44% [33/74], respectively; P = .52) with the 6-week acute treatment, but combined therapy produced a higher remission rate compared with CBT alone during the 6-month extended therapy phase and the 6-month follow-up period (56% [43/74 and 32/59] vs 43% [34/75 and 28/68]; P = .05). The best long-term outcome was obtained with patients treated with combined therapy initially, followed by CBT alone, as evidenced by higher remission rates at the 6-month follow-up compared with patients who continued to take zolpidem during extended therapy (68% [20/30] vs 42% [12/29]; P = .04). CONCLUSION: In patients with persistent insomnia, the addition of medication to CBT produced added benefits during acute therapy, but long-term outcome was optimized when medication is discontinued during maintenance CBT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00042146.

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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations786
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMASame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207