Cited by 192Sleep and related disordersPosttraumatic Stress Disorder ResearchSleep and Wakefulness Research

A meta-analysis of imagery rehearsal for post-trauma nightmares: Effects on nightmare frequency, sleep quality, and posttraumatic stress

Open access
Casement, Melynda D., Swanson, Leslie M.·2012·Clinical Psychology Review

Abstract

This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy of imagery rehearsal as a treatment for nightmares, general sleep disturbance, and symptoms of post-traumatic stress. Bibliographic databases and cited references were searched to identify clinical trials of imagery rehearsal in individuals with post-trauma nightmares. Thirteen studies met inclusion criteria and reported sleep and post-traumatic stress outcomes in sufficient detail to calculate effect sizes. Results indicate that imagery rehearsal had large effects on nightmare frequency, sleep quality, and PTSD symptoms from the initial to post-treatment assessments. These effects were sustained through 6 to 12 months follow-up. Furthermore, interventions that included both imagery rehearsal and cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia resulted in greater treatment-related improvement in sleep quality than imagery rehearsal alone. Combined treatment did not improve outcomes for PTSD or nightmares. Notably, effect sizes were small in the single study that included an active-treatment control condition. Future research should identify necessary and sufficient components of interventions for trauma-related sleep disturbance and post-traumatic stress (e.g., exposure, cognitive reappraisal, sleep and circadian regulation).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cpr.2012.06.002

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Most studies of IRT focus on adults with classic PTSD, with limited research in adolescents or CPTSD populations.

    “However, most studies focus on adults with “classic” PTSD, with limited research in adolescents or in CPTSD populations [31, 33, 34].”

    From Efficacy of imagery rehearsal therapy in the treatment of traumatic nightmares in youth with complex post-traumatic stress disorder (2026) · cites this paper as [31]

    The Results > Sample Characteristics section (page not provided) says all included studies used adult samples, none with children met inclusion criteria, and 86% of participants in studies reporting diagnoses had PTSD. This supports the adult and PTSD portions of the claim, but the paper does not distinguish “classic” PTSD from CPTSD or assess how much research exists in CPTSD populations. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Imagery rehearsal therapy (IRT) is effective in adults, reducing nightmare frequency and distress and improving sleep.

    “Its efficacy is well demonstrated in adults, reducing nightmare frequency and distress and improving sleep [31, 32].”

    From Efficacy of imagery rehearsal therapy in the treatment of traumatic nightmares in youth with complex post-traumatic stress disorder (2026) · cites this paper as [31]

    The Discussion reports that imagery rehearsal reduced nightmare frequency and improved sleep quality, and Results > Sample Characteristics confirms that all included studies used adult samples. The meta-analysis concerns post-trauma nightmares and does not report a reduction in nightmare distress as a separate outcome. It also evaluates imagery rehearsal protocols collectively, rather than IRT alone. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Lipsey MW Wilson DB 2001 Practical meta-analysis 49 Thousand Oaks, CA Sage Publications

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Casement, M. D., & Swanson, L. M.
Affiliations
  • Boston University (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Casement, Melynda D.
Venue
Clinical Psychology Review
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-08
Volume
32
Issue
6
Pages
566-574
ISSN
0272-7358 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1998601793
Cited by
192
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 7
FWCI
1.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (T32MH019836)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
Keywords
post-traumatic stress disorder, sleep disorders, sleep quality, cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, treatment efficacy, cognitive reappraisal, exposure therapy
MeSH terms
Dreams, Female, Humans, Implosive Therapy, Male, Sleep Wake Disorders, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Imagery, Psychotherapy

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