Benzodiazepines and Zolpidem for Chronic Insomnia: A Meta-analysis of Treatment Efficacy
Abstract
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of benzodiazepines and zolpidem tartrate in chronic insomnia based on a quantitative review of literature. Data sources Articles from 1966 to 1996 were identified using MEDLINE, by a manual review of relevant journals, and from bibliographies of identified articles. Study selection Studies using randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel or crossover designs with benzodiazepines or zolpidem in adults younger than 65 years with chronic insomnia (modified Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria for primary insomnia) were selected for review. Self-report and polysomnographic measures of sleep-onset latency, total sleep time, number of awakenings, and sleep quality were selected as outcomes. Data extraction Twenty-two studies met the selection criteria. A combined test of Pvalues was performed, pooling broadly from the 22 studies to determine whether medication was superior to placebo. A combined test of effect sizes was performed on the subset of studies that reported effect size information to determine the magnitude of medication effect. Data synthesis A homogeneous sample of studies summarized 1894 patients treated for a median duration of 7 days. The combined test of P values demonstrated that medication was superior to placebo in all 4 outcome measures. Treatment response was moderate in magnitude by the combined test of effect sizes. Conclusions Benzodiazepines and zolpidem produced relia…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Each of the short/intermediate-acting BzRAs (zaleplon, zolpidem, eszopiclone, triazolam, temazepam) has been shown to have positive effects on sleep latency, TST, and/or WASO in placebo-controlled trials.
“each has been shown to have posi -tive effects on sleep latency, TST, and/or WASO in placebocontrolled trials. 32-37”
From Clinical Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Chronic Insomnia in Adults (2008) · cites this paper as [34]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 77 · Cited by 451
- Authors
- Nowell, P. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- Corresponding author
- Nowell, Peter D.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1997-12-24
- Volume
- 278
- Issue
- 24
- Pages
- 2170
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2038637825
- Cited by
- 451
- References
- 77
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 33
- FWCI
- 19.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- JAMA (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH16804, MH-00295, MH-37869, R01MH037869, T32MH016804)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
- Keywords
- chronic insomnia, benzodiazepines, zolpidem, hypnotics, sleep latency, total sleep time, awakening, sleep quality, primary insomnia, drug efficacy, placebo comparison
- MeSH terms
- Zolpidem, Adult, Benzodiazepines, Chronic Disease, Humans, Hypnotics and Sedatives, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Middle Aged, Pyridines, Sleep, Statistics as Topic, Anti-Anxiety Agents, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review