MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2976150508 · doi:10.2196/14647

Effect of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia on Insomnia Symptoms for Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

2019· article· en· W2976150508 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammed M. Alshehri, Aqeel M. Alenazi, Jeffrey C. Hoover, Shaima Alothman, Milind A. Phadnis, Jason Rucker, Christie A. Befort, John M. Miles, Patricia M. Kluding, Catherine Siengsukon

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaRandomized controlled trialCognitive behavioral therapy for insomniaAnxietyType 2 diabetesMedicineCognitive behavioral therapyPhysical therapyPsychiatryDiabetes mellitusInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Insomnia symptoms are a common form of sleep difficulty among people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) affecting sleep quality and health outcomes. Several interventional approaches have been used to improve sleep outcomes in people with T2D. Nonpharmacological approaches, such as cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), show promising results regarding safety and sustainability of improvements, although CBT-I has not been examined in people with T2D. Promoting sleep for people with insomnia and T2D could improve insomnia severity and diabetes outcomes. Objective The objective of this study is to establish a protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) to examine the effect of 6 sessions of CBT-I on insomnia severity (primary outcome), sleep variability, and other health-related outcomes in individuals with T2D and insomnia symptoms. Methods This RCT will use random mixed block size randomization with stratification to assign 28 participants with T2D and insomnia symptoms to either a CBT-I group or a health education group. Outcomes including insomnia severity; sleep variability; diabetes self-care behavior (DSCB); glycemic control (A1c); glucose level; sleep quality; daytime sleepiness; and symptoms of depression, anxiety, and pain will be gathered before and after the 6-week intervention. Chi-square and independent t tests will be used to test for between-group differences at baseline. Independent t tests will be used to examine the effect of the CBT-I intervention on change score means for insomnia severity, sleep variability, DSCB, A1c, fatigue, sleep quality, daytime sleepiness, and severity of depression, anxiety, and pain. For all analyses, alpha level will be set at .05. Results This study recruitment began in February 2019 and was completed in September 2019. Conclusions The intervention, including 6 sessions of CBT-I, will provide insight about its effect in improving insomnia symptoms, sleep variability, fatigue, and diabetes-related health outcomes in people with T2D and those with insomnia symptoms when compared with control. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03713996; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03713996 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/14647

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.008
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.014

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.532
Teacher spread0.430 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicSleep and related disorders→French-language works237,207→