↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of acupuncture for sleep quality in people with insomnia

Overview of attention for article published in Complementary Therapies in Medicine, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
11 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
91 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
239 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A systematic review of acupuncture for sleep quality in people with insomnia
Published in
Complementary Therapies in Medicine, February 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.ctim.2016.02.007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Johannah Linda Shergis, Xiaojia Ni, Melinda L. Jackson, Anthony Lin Zhang, Xinfeng Guo, Yan Li, Chuanjian Lu, Charlie Changli Xue

Abstract

Acupuncture is widely used in Asia and increasingly in Western countries. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the effects of acupuncture for insomnia. We identified randomized controlled trials from English and Chinese databases. Data were extracted using a predefined form and analysed using RevMan 5.2. We included studies that compared acupuncture to sham/placebo, standard pharmacotherapy or cognitive behavioral therapy. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome was sleep quality assessed by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). A total of 30 studies involving 2363 participants were included. Acupuncture point combinations included the use of at least one of the recommended points for insomnia, HT7, GV20, SP6. Pharmacotherapy control was used in 27 studies and sham/placebo in three studies. Cognitive behavioral therapy was not used in any of the studies. Pharmacotherapies in all studies were benzodiazepine receptor agonists, except for one that used an antidepressant. Acupuncture was superior to sham/placebo in terms of PSQI (MD -0.79, 95% CI -1.38, -0.19, I(2)=49%). Acupuncture was also more effective than pharmacotherapy (MD -2.76, 95% CI -3.67, -1.85, I(2)=94%). Most studies were at risk of bias. Some mild adverse events were reported but they were not causally related to the acupuncture treatments. Acupuncture compared to sham/placebo and pharmacotherapy showed statistically significant results. However, the evidence is limited by bias in the included studies and heterogeneity. Well-designed studies are needed to confirm the results identified in this review.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 239 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 238 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 57 24%
Student > Master 25 10%
Researcher 20 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 5%
Other 34 14%
Unknown 74 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 40 17%
Psychology 22 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Neuroscience 4 2%
Other 17 7%
Unknown 81 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 07 June 2022.
All research outputs
#1,881,432
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Complementary Therapies in Medicine
#285
of 1,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,434
of 313,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Complementary Therapies in Medicine
#12
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,631 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 313,543 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.