| Title |
Cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia and sleep hygiene in fibromyalgia: a randomized controlled trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Behavioral Medicine, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10865-013-9520-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. Pilar Martínez, Elena Miró, Ana I. Sánchez, Carolina Díaz-Piedra, Rafael Cáliz, Johan W. S. Vlaeyen, Gualberto Buela-Casal |
| Abstract |
Sleep disturbances play an important role in the exacerbation of pain and other troubling symptoms reported by patients with fibromyalgia (FM). The objective of this trial was to analyze the efficacy of a cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) versus a sleep hygiene (SH) education program at improving sleep and other clinical manifestations in FM. Sixty-four FM women with insomnia were randomly assigned to the CBT-I or the SH groups, and 59 completed the treatments (30 in the CBT-I group and 29 in the SH group). Participants completed several self-report questionnaires at pre-, post-treatment and follow-ups. The CBT-I group reported significant improvements at post-treatment in several sleep variables, fatigue, daily functioning, pain catastrophizing, anxiety and depression. The SH group only improved significantly in subjective sleep quality. Patients in the CBT-I group showed significantly greater changes than those in the SH group in most outcome measures. The findings underscore the usefulness of CBT-I in the multidisciplinary management of FM. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| New Zealand | 1 | 20% |
| Canada | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 325 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 320 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 55 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 45 | 14% |
| Researcher | 31 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 27 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 7% |
| Other | 63 | 19% |
| Unknown | 82 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 87 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 56 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 44 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 3% |
| Sports and Recreations | 8 | 2% |
| Other | 29 | 9% |
| Unknown | 92 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2021.
All research outputs
#3,158,629
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#220
of 1,069 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,405
of 197,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,069 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 197,451 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.