Cited by 137Sleep and related disordersDigital Mental Health InterventionsObstructive Sleep Apnea Research

Comparative efficacy of digital cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Hasan, Faizul, Tu, Yu-Kang, Yang, Chien-Ming, James Gordon, Christopher, Wu, Dean, Lee, Hsin-Chien, Yuliana, Lia Taurussia, Herawati, Lucky +2 more·2022·Sleep Medicine Reviews

Abstract

The comparative efficacy of various approaches of digital cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTi) is still unclear. This network meta-analysis explored the comparative efficacy of digital CBTi approaches in adults with insomnia. Four electronic databases were searched from inception to June 27, 2020. Primary outcomes were self-reported total sleep time (TST), sleep onset latency (SOL), wake after sleep onset (WASO), sleep efficiency (SE), and insomnia symptoms; these were measured using sleep diaries or valid questionnaires. A random-effects network meta-analysis in a frequentist framework was used. Fifty-four randomized controlled trials comprising 11,815 participants were included. Compared with usual care, web-based CBTi with a therapist demonstrated significantly longer TST (mean difference [MD]: 23.19 min, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 18.98-27.39 min), shorter SOL (MD: -18.76 min, 95% CI -24.20 to -13.31 min), lower WASO (MD: -31.40 min, 95% CI: -36.26 to -26.55 min), and greater SE (MD: 10.37%, 95% CI: 8.08%-12.65%). The surface under the cumulative ranking curve indicates that web-based CBTi with therapists is most likely to be ranked the highest among all treatments, and thus, this network meta-analysis suggests that such a treatment is the optimal intervention for improving sleep duration and SE as well as the reductions in SOL and WASO. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020171134.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.smrv.2021.101567

Cites

91 of 91 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
Hasan, F., Tu, Y.-K., Yang, C.-M., James Gordon, C., Wu, D., Lee, H.-C., Yuliana, L. T., Herawati, L., Chen, T.-J., & Chiu, H.-Y.
Affiliations
  • Taipei Medical University (TW)
  • National Taiwan University (TW)
  • National Chengchi University (TW)
  • Taipei Medical University-Shuang Ho Hospital (TW)
  • Taipei Medical University Hospital (TW)
  • Kementerian Kesehatan Republik Indonesia (ID)
Corresponding author
Chiu, Hsiao-Yean
Venue
Sleep Medicine Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-02
Volume
61
Pages
101567
ISSN
1087-0792 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3214315566
Cited by
137
References
91
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 1
FWCI
2.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Sleep Medicine Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (110-2628-B-038-017)
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
digital cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, insomnia, online therapy, total sleep time, sleep latency, wake after sleep onset, sleep efficiency, sleep duration, insomnia symptoms, treatment efficacy comparison
MeSH terms
Adult, Humans, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Sleep, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Polysomnography, Self Report

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