MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406376429 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsab270

Use of a blinded hypnotic tapering strategy to promote hypnotic discontinuation

2021· article· en· W4406376429 on OpenAlexaff
Jack D. Edinger, Frederick S. Wamboldt, Rachel L. Johnson, Bryan Hudson, Sheila C. Tsai, Charles M. Morin, Kristen E. Holm

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaperingBlindingDiscontinuationHypnoticMedicineAnesthesiaInsomniaPsychologyRandomized controlled trialInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Study Objectives Cognitive behavioral insomnia therapy (CBT-I) combined with supervised open-label tapering is effective for helping hypnotic-dependent patients discontinue their hypnotics. This study tested whether slowing the tapering pace and blinding the tapering process enhance outcomes. Methods Seventy-eight benzodiazepines (BZD) or benzodiazepine receptor agonists (BZRA) users completed 4 CBT-I sessions, followed by a randomly assigned blinded tapering protocol wherein hypnotic dosage was: held constant, reduced by 10% every two weeks, or reduced by 25% every two weeks. After 20 weeks those who did not have their medications reduced were offered an open-label tapering protocol. Participants completed assessments 3 months after completing their respective tapering protocols. Outcomes included discontinuation rates, hypnotic withdrawal effects, and responder and remission rates determined by Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) scores. Results No differences were observed between the two tapering paces (10% vs. 25%). Blinded tapering had a consistent association with better outcomes that did not reach statistical significance. At 3-month follow-up the number of patients needed to be treated with blinded taper instead of open-label tapering in order for one additional individual to achieve desired endpoints was 7.7 for BZD/BZRA discontinuation, 3.4 for hypnotic withdrawal effects, 4.4 for ISI responder status, and 5.0 for insomnia remission. One-third (32.3%) of the sample was using benzo-related hypnotics at 3-month follow-up. Twice as many individuals (64.6%) were using some type of medication or substance for sleep at this time point. Conclusions Blinding tapering may enhance hypnotic discontinuation rates and insomnia treatment response and remission rates. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02831894, “The Role of Tapering Pace and Selected Traits on Hypnotic Discontinuation;” URL:https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02831894?term=hypnotics&cond=Insomnia&cntry=US&state=US%3ACO&city=Denver&draw=2&rank=2

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207