MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The effect of weighted blankets on sleep quality and mental health symptoms in people with psychiatric disorders in inpatient and outpatient settings: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4402746186 on OpenAlexaff
Stanley Wong, Nicholas Fabiano, Brandon Luu, Chanhee Seo, Arnav Gupta, Helena K. Kim, Risa Shorr, Brett D. M. Jones, Michael Mak, Muhammad Ishrat Husain

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric Research · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityWestern UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthOttawa HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisPsychiatryMental healthSleep qualityPsychologyMedicineClinical psychologyInsomnia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is limited synthesized evidence for weighted blankets usage in psychiatric patients. We performed a PRISMA compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of weighted blankets on sleep and mental health outcomes in psychiatric patients. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO were searched up to December 15th, 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) or cohort studies reporting objective outcome scales of sleep and mental health were included. Standardized mean difference (SMD) measured effect size. Q and I 2 tests measured heterogeneity. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 and NIH Quality Assessment Tool assessed risk of bias. Nine studies of 553 psychiatric inpatients and outpatients with diagnoses including depression, bipolar disorder, ADHD, and autism. 289 participants received weighted blankets and 264 were in control groups. Intervention length ranged from 5 min to one year. Four studies reported evidence for weighted blankets in improving insomnia, total sleep time, and sleep onset latency. Six studies reported evidence for reducing anxiety symptoms. When compared to placebo, those using weighted blankets had improvements to anxiety symptoms (SMD = −0.47, 95% CI: −0.68 to −0.25, p < 0.001). One RCT had low risk of bias, 3 had some concerns, 1 was high risk. Three cohort studies were “fair” and one was “poor” in quality. It was found that weighted blankets can be effective in reducing anxiety in psychiatric patients. However, the literature is limited by heterogeneity of outcome reporting, lack of well designed RCTs, and small sample sizes. Highlighting the need for higher quality studies. • Sleep is disturbed in people suffering from mental illness • Weighted blankets are a non-pharmacological sleep aid that are easily accessible • Synthesized evidence for weighted blankets in psychiatric patients is limited • Weighted blankets improves symptoms of insomnia and total sleep time • Weighted blankets significantly improves symptoms of anxiety in psychiatric patients

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.396 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatric ResearchSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207