Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia Tailored to Patients With Cardiovascular Disease: A Pre–Post Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: There is little research assessing the use of cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) among patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD), even less on the effects of CBT-I on CVD risk factors such as anxiety and depression, and to our knowledge, only limited studies of the efficacy of CBT-I protocols with cardiac disease-specific modifications. The objective of this study is to evaluate a group-based CBT-I intervention tailored to patients with CVD on sleep quality, duration, and mental health. Participants: A sample of 47 participants (25 men) diagnosed with primary insomnia were included in this study. Methods: This study used a pre–post design comparing outcomes before and after a group intervention. Clinicians in a cardiac center referred CVD patients with self-reported sleep disturbance to the intervention group. Following screening and confirmation of insomnia disorder, participants completed a six-week CBT-I group-based intervention tailored for patients with CVD. Participants completed sleep diaries and questionnaires, including the Insomnia Severity Index, Beck Depression Inventory-II, and Beck Anxiety Inventory, pre- and postintervention. Results: Participants’ sleep outcomes (sleep duration, maintenance, efficiency, latency, and quality) were significantly improved and patients reported significantly fewer symptoms of anxiety, depression, and insomnia following the CBT-I intervention (p values < .05). Conclusions: After participating in a CBT-I group intervention tailored for cardiac patients, patients reported improved sleep and significantly lower levels of anxiety and depression. Randomized trials of this intervention are warranted.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it