Cognitive‐behavioural therapy for insomnia mechanism of action: Exploring the homeostatic <scp>K</scp> ‐complex involvement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Investigating the mechanisms of action of cognitive‐behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT‐I), the first‐line treatment for chronic insomnia disorder (ID), can contribute to the overall understanding of insomnia and its treatment. To date, no study has examined the relationship between K‐complexes (KC) and CBT‐I, despite the known homeostatic and protective function of this relevant sleep brainwave. This retrospective multicentre study aims to explore the relationship between electroencephalographic (EEG) indices and CBT‐I, with a particular focus on evaluating an index of sleep homeostasis identified by KC. This research is designed to assess the predictive value of this index for treatment outcomes and to examine its variations before and after intervention. Ninety eight patients with ID underwent a 6–8 week in‐person CBT‐I programme, with pre‐and post‐treatment evaluation conducted using polysomnography (PSG) and the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI). The main outcome was determined by calculating the slope of the linear equation indexing the KC density (number of KC/minutes of N2) in each non‐artifacted NREM stage 2 epoch throughout the night (KCSlope). Furthermore, the sample was categorised into Responders (ISIdecrease ≥8) and non‐Responders (ISIdecrease <8). The results indicate that the KC Slope is effective not only to predict treatment response (one‐way ANOVA, F = 7.831 p = 0.007; Responders = −2.954*10 −5 ± 3.346*10 −5 , non‐Responders = −5.583*10 −5 ± 5.305*10 −5 ; adjusted for PSG wake after sleep onset at the baseline), but also to detect a statistically significant improvement in sleep pressure following CBT‐I (Wilcoxon signed‐rank test W = 3074.000 p = 0.022; KCSlope pre‐treatment = −4.054*10 −5 ± 4.446*10 −5 , KCSlope post‐treatment = −4.797*10 −5 ± 5.710*10 −5 ). These findings suggest that CBT‐I increases sleep pressure in patients with chronic insomnia, highlighting a novel and relevant biomarker in this context.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".