Non-pharmacological management of primary and secondary insomnia among older people: review of assessment tools and treatments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: primary and secondary insomnia, especially among older adults, is frequently encountered by family physicians. Pharmacological interventions, although effective in some circumstances, can be detrimental in others. Non-pharmacological management of insomnia may allow the patients to self-administer the treatment. OBJECTIVES: review of published literature of assessment tools and treatments for primary and secondary insomnia. RESULTS: two frequently used self-reporting methods for obtaining sleep data are sleep diaries and Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index. A large amount of research supports the use of non-pharmacological treatments such as stimulus control, sleep restriction, sleep hygiene education, cognitive therapy, multi-component therapy and paradoxical intention. CONCLUSION: assessing the nature of insomnia by using an effective assessment tool and providing patients with a non-pharmacological treatment should be the first intervention for insomnia. It is shown that non-pharmacological treatments for primary and secondary insomnia are feasible and effective alternatives to the use of benzodiazepines, and that family physicians should consider these when managing older patients with insomnia.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".