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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy in children and adolescents with insomnia: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1590/1414-431x20187070 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhong-Rui Ma, Li-Jun Shi, Ming-Hong Deng |
| Abstract |
Insomnia is highly prevalent in children and adolescents. However, the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-i) in children and adolescents remains controversial. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of CBT-i in children and adolescents. We conducted a search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and PsycINFO to select primary studies evaluating CBT-i in children and adolescents that were primarily diagnosed through standardized diagnostic criteria. The primary outcomes of the meta-analysis included sleep onset latency (SOL), wake after sleep onset (WASO), total sleep time (TST), and sleep efficiency (SE%). Six randomized controlled trials and four open-label trials met all inclusion criteria. A total of 464 participants (ranging from 5-19 years of age) were included. Based on the results from sleep logs, a significant pooled effect size was observed for SOL and SE%. However, no significant pooled effect size was found for WASO or TST. Results from actigraphy were consistent with the sleep logs. A significant pooled effect size was observed for SOL and SE%, and no significant pooled effect size was found for WASO or TST. CBT-i might be effective in the treatment of children and adolescents with insomnia. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Egypt | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 6% |
| Researcher | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 33 | 69% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 7 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 34 | 71% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 March 2021.
All research outputs
#3,276,244
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
#69
of 1,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,790
of 449,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
#5
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 1,254 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 449,583 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.