Feasibility and acceptability of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) or acupuncture for insomnia and related distress among cancer caregivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Insomnia is a common, distressing, and impairing psychological outcome experienced by informal caregivers (ICs) of patients with cancer. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) and acupuncture both have known benefits for patients with cancer, but such benefits have yet to be evaluated among ICs. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effects of CBT-I and acupuncture among ICs with moderate or greater levels of insomnia. METHOD: Participants were randomized to eight sessions of CBT-I or ten sessions of acupuncture. RESULTS: Results highlighted challenges of identifying interested and eligible ICs and the impact of perception of intervention on retention and likely ultimately outcome. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESULTS: Findings suggest preliminary support for non-pharmacological interventions to treat insomnia in ICs and emphasize the importance of matching treatment modality to the preferences and needs of ICs.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".