Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 221

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Treatment outcomes in REM sleep behavior disorder

Open access
McCarter, Stuart J., Boswell, Christopher L., St. Louis, Erik K., Dueffert, Lucas G., Slocumb, Nancy, Boeve, Bradley F., Silber, Michael H., Olson, Eric J., Tippmann-Peikert, Maja·2013·Sleep Medicine

Abstract

Objective REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD) is usually characterized by potentially injurious dream enactment behaviors (DEB). RBD treatment aims to reduce DEBs and prevent injury, but outcomes require further elucidation. We surveyed RBD patients to describe longitudinal treatment outcomes with melatonin and clonazepam. Methods We surveyed and reviewed records of consecutive RBD patients seen at Mayo Clinic between 2008–2010 to describe RBD-related injury frequency/severity as well as RBD Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ratings, medication dosage, and side effects. Statistical analyses were performed with appropriate non-parametric matched pairs tests before and after treatment, and with comparative group analyses for continuous and categorical variables between treatment groups. The primary outcome variables were RBD VAS ratings and injury frequency. Results Forty-five (84.9%) of 53 respondent surveys were analyzed. Mean age was 65.8 years and 35 (77.8%) patients were men. Neurodegenerative disorders were seen in 24 (53%) patients, and 25 (56%) received antidepressants. Twenty-five patients received melatonin, 18 received clonazepam, and 2 received both as initial treatment. Before treatment, 27 patients (60%) reported an RBD associated injury. Median dosages were melatonin 6 mg and clonazepam 0.5 mg. RBD VAS ratings were significantly improved following both treatments (pm=.0001, pc=.0005). Melatonin-treated patients reported significantly reduced injuries (pm=.001, pc=.06) and fewer adverse effects (p=0.07). Mean durations of treatment were no different between groups (for clonazepam 53.9 +/− 29.5 months, and for melatonin 27.4 +/− 24 months, p=0.13) and there were no differences in treatment retention, with 28% of melatonin and 22% of clonazepam-treated patients discontinuing treatment (p=0.43). Conclusions Melatonin and clonazepam were each reported to reduce RBD behaviors and injuries and appeared comparably effective in our naturalistic practice experience. Melatonin-treated patients reported less frequent adverse effects than those treated with clonazepam. More effective treatments that would eliminate injury potential and evidence-based treatment outcomes from prospective clinical trials for RBD are needed.

Overview

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.sleep.2012.09.018

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 221

Metadata

Authors
McCarter, S. J., Boswell, C. L., St. Louis, E. K., Dueffert, L. G., Slocumb, N., Boeve, B. F., Silber, M. H., Olson, E. J., & Tippmann-Peikert, M.
Venue
Sleep Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-03
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
237-242
ISSN
1389-9457 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1998571654
Cited by
221
References
3
FWCI
29.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Treatment outcomes in REM sleep behavior disorder. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.sleep.2012.09.018
The paper
McCarter, S. J., Boswell, C. L., St. Louis, E. K., Dueffert, L. G., Slocumb, N., Boeve, B. F., Silber, M. H., Olson, E. J., & Tippmann-Peikert, M. (2013). Treatment outcomes in REM sleep behavior disorder. Sleep Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sleep.2012.09.018

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.