Cited by 386Sleep and related disordersSleep and Wakefulness ResearchObstructive Sleep Apnea Research

Sleep changes in the disorder of insomnia: a meta-analysis of polysomnographic studies

Baglioni, Chiara, Regen, Wolfram, Teghen, Armand, Spiegelhalder, Kai, Feige, Bernd, Nissen, Christoph, Riemann, Dieter·2014·Sleep Medicine Reviews

Abstract

Insomnia is a highly prevalent health problem worldwide. Primary insomnia (PI), i.e., insomnia not due to another disorder or substance use, represents a model to elucidate the pathophysiology of sleep. However, prior research in patients with PI has failed to demonstrate consistent abnormalities in the state-of-the-art assessment of sleep (polysomnography). The aim of this meta-analysis was to clarify whether there are identifiable polysomnographic sleep changes that correspond to the subjective complaints of patients with PI. Medline and PsycInfo databases were searched from 1994 to 2012. Effects were calculated as standardized mean differences. Studies were pooled with the random-effects metaanalytic model. Twenty-three studies met inclusion criteria. In total, 582 patients with PI and 485 good sleeper controls (GSC) were evaluated. The results showed that patients with PI present a disruption of sleep continuity and a significant reduction of slow wave sleep (SWS) and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep compared to GSC. The observed changes in sleep architecture, i.e., reductions in SWS and REM sleep, hitherto did not count among the typical polysomnographic findings in patients with PI. An advanced knowledge of the polysomnographic changes in PI may add to foster the understanding of the pathophysiology of sleep and its bi-directional relationships with somatic and mental disorders.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.smrv.2013.04.001

Cites

83 of 83 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
Baglioni, C., Regen, W., Teghen, A., Spiegelhalder, K., Feige, B., Nissen, C., & Riemann, D.
Affiliations
University of Freiburg (DE)
Corresponding author
Baglioni, Chiara
Venue
Sleep Medicine Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-06
Volume
18
Issue
3
Pages
195-213
ISSN
1087-0792 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1979055237
Cited by
386
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 22 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 3
FWCI
3.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Sleep Medicine Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Keywords
primary insomnia, sleep architecture, slow-wave sleep, REM sleep, sleep continuity, polysomnography findings, sleep pathophysiology
MeSH terms
Arousal, Humans, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Reference Values, Sleep, Sleep, REM, Polysomnography

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