Cited by 325Sleep and related disordersDigital Mental Health InterventionsObstructive Sleep Apnea Research

Effect of a Web-Based Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Insomnia Intervention With 1-Year Follow-up: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Ritterband, Lee M., Thorndike, Frances P., Ingersoll, Karen S., Lord, Holly R., Gonder-Frederick, Linda, Frederick, Christina, Quigg, Mark S., Cohn, Wendy F. +1 more·2017·JAMA Psychiatry

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Although cognitive behavior therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) has been established as the first-line recommendation for the millions of adults with chronic insomnia, there is a paucity of trained clinicians to deliver this much needed treatment. Internet-delivered CBT-I has shown promise as a method to overcome this obstacle; however, the long-term effectiveness has not been proven in a representative sample with chronic insomnia. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a web-based, automated CBT-I intervention to improve insomnia in the short term (9 weeks) and long term (1 year). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized clinical trial comparing the internet CBT-I with internet patient education at baseline, 9 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. Altogether, 303 adults with chronic insomnia self-referred to participate, of whom 151 (49.8%) reported at least 1 medical or psychiatric comorbidity. INTERVENTIONS: The internet CBT-I (Sleep Healthy Using the Internet [SHUTi]) was a 6-week fully automated, interactive, and tailored web-based program that incorporated the primary tenets of face-to-face CBT-I. The online patient education program provided nontailored and fixed online information about insomnia. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary sleep outcomes were self-reported online ratings of insomnia severity (Insomnia Severity Index) and online sleep diary-derived values for sleep-onset latency and wake after sleep onset, collected prospectively for 10 days at each assessment period. The secondary sleep outcomes included sleep efficiency, number of awakenings, sleep quality, and total sleep time. RESULTS: Among 303 participants, the mean (SD) age was 43.28 (11.59) years, and 71.9% (218 of 303) were female. Of these, 151 were randomized to the SHUTi group and 152 to the online patient education group. Results of the 3 primary sleep outcomes showed that the overall group × time interaction was significant for all variables, favoring the SHUTi group (Insomnia Severity Index [F3,1063 = 20.65, P < .001], sleep-onset latency [F3,1042 = 6.01, P < .001], and wake after sleep onset [F3,1042 = 12.68, P < .001]). Within-group effect sizes demonstrated improvements from baseline to postassessment for the SHUTi participants (range, Cohen d = 0.79 [95% CI, 0.55-1.04] to d = 1.90 [95% CI, 1.62-2.18]). Treatment effects were maintained at the 1-year follow-up (SHUTi Insomnia Severity Index d = 2.32 [95% CI, 2.01-2.63], sleep-onset latency d = 1.41 [95% CI, 1.15-1.68], and wake after sleep onset d = 0.95 [95% CI, 0.70-1.21]), with 56.6% (69 of 122) achieving remission status and 69.7% (85 of 122) deemed treatment responders at 1 year based on Insomnia Severity Index data. All secondary sleep outcomes, except total sleep time, also showed significant overall group × time interactions, favoring the SHUTi group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Given its efficacy and availability, internet-delivered CBT-I may have a key role in the dissemination of effective behavioral treatments for insomnia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01438697.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2016.3249

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ritterband, L. M., Thorndike, F. P., Ingersoll, K. S., Lord, H. R., Gonder-Frederick, L., Frederick, C., Quigg, M. S., Cohn, W. F., & Morin, C. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Virginia (US)
  • Université Laval (CA)
Corresponding author
Ritterband, Lee M.
Venue
JAMA Psychiatry
Published
2017-01-01
Volume
74
Issue
1
Pages
68
ISSN
2168-622X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2558123475
Cited by
325
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 1
FWCI
38.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • JAMA Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH086758)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, online therapy, chronic insomnia, long-term follow-up, sleep latency, wake after sleep onset, insomnia severity, sleep efficiency, sleep quality, online patient education, medication adherence, psychiatric comorbidity, sleep diary, clinician shortage
MeSH terms
Adult, Behavior Therapy, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Comorbidity, Treatment Outcome, Internet

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