Effects of Cognitive Therapy for Depression on Insomnia in Women with Metastatic Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective This study assessed the effects of cognitive therapy (CT) for depression on insomnia in women with metastatic breast cancer.Methods Thirty-four women with metastatic breast cancer and depressive symptoms were randomly assigned to CT for depression or a waitlist control group (WLC). Insomnia was measured using the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) at pre-treatment (PRE) and posttreatment (POST), as well as 3 (FU3) and 6 (FU6) months later.Results In the CT group, the proportion of women obtaining a clinically significant level of insomnia (ISI ≥8) decreased significantly from pre- to posttreatment (PRE = 80.0%; POST = 26.7%; p = .013). The mean ISI score differed significantly between groups at posttreatment/waiting (intervention = 5.5; control = 12.7; p = .048) and the ISI score decreased significantly from pre- to posttreatment (PRE = 11.5; POST = 5.5; p = .001). Additional analyses were performed pooling both groups together after WLC patients received CT. The proportion of patients with a clinical level of insomnia (PRE = 77.5%; POST = 28.3%; FU3 = 46.3%; FU6 = 21.0%; p < .0001), and the mean ISI score significantly decreased over time(PRE = 12.1; POST = 5.0; FU3 = 8.0; FU6 = 5.5; p < .0001).Conclusions Although insomnia improved over time, 21.0% to 46.3% of women reported residual insomnia symptoms following CT for depression. Therefore, a concomitant treatment that directly targets insomnia should be provided to women with cooccurring depression and insomnia.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".