MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159054648 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsab072.517

518 Preliminary report on the efficacy of behavioral therapy for insomnia in shift work disorder: a randomized control trial

2021· article· en· W3159054648 on OpenAlexaff
Annie Vallières, Sèverine Garnier, Alric Pappathomas, Chantal Mérette, Célyne Bastien

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaRandomized controlled trialMedicineLight therapyShift workMultivariate analysis of variancePhysical therapySleep disorderCognitive behavioral therapy for insomniaPsychologyPsychiatryClinical psychologyCognitive behavioral therapyInternal medicineMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Around 33% of shift workers suffer from shift work disorder (SWD). SWD includes insomnia and sleepiness related to the atypical work schedule. Most SWD treatments rely on light therapy or pharmacology. Few studies explored CBT-I efficacy for insomnia in shift work and reported promising results. The study aims to evaluate the efficacity of a behavioral therapy for insomnia adapted for SWD (BT-SWD). Methods Forty-three night shift workers meeting SWD criteria were recruited (mean age = 34 years old; 77% women) and randomized to either BT-SWD or waiting list control group. Eight participants dropped-out while waiting. Before and after treatment, participants completed questionnaires (ESS, ISI, STAI and BDI-II) and sleep diaries throughout the experimentation. BT-SWD involves sleep restriction therapy and stimulus control for insomnia as well as fixed sleep periods in the dark for shift workers. BT-SWD has been applied to night sleep, day sleep, and naps in this order. It consists of 6 sessions of 50 minutes delivered on 8 weeks. A mixed MANOVA was conducted on questionnaires scores with group (treatment or waitlist) as the between-subject factor and time as the within subject factor. Results A multivariate interaction effect was significant, F(6,21) = 8.24, p<.001. A univariate interaction effect was observed for the BDI-II (p=.042), the trait scale of the STAI (p=.021) and the ISI, both for night sleep (p=.027) and day sleep (p<.001), indicating that the scores of participants in the treatement group lowered significantly more than those of participants on the waiting group. The treatment group had a significantly less severe insomnia, both for day sleep during night work (p<.001), and night sleep during days off (p<.001). There was no significant difference between the control and the treatment group on sleepiness levels. Conclusion BT-SWD is effective at reducing insomnia severity as well as levels of trait anxiety and depression. Results are more equivocal for sleepiness. The waiting list control group design used has led to an important attrition in the context of shift work. Further analyses are needed to determine the BT-SWD efficacy on sleep variables. Support (if any) The study was supported by a CIHR grant (#110254) awarded to the first author

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207