Cited by 43Sleep and related disordersSleep and Work-Related FatiguePsychological Treatments and Assessments

Is cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTi) efficacious for treating insomnia symptoms in shift workers? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Reynolds, Amy C., Sweetman, Alexander, Crowther, Meagan E., Paterson, Jessica L., Scott, Hannah, Lechat, Bastien, Wanstall, Sian E., Brown, Brandon WJ. +3 more·2023·Sleep Medicine Reviews

Abstract

Shift workers commonly report insomnia symptoms. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBTi) is the first line treatment for insomnia, however efficacy in shift workers is not well understood. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates existing trials of CBTi in shift working populations. A systematic literature search was conducted across seven electronic databases (n = 2120). Fifty-two full-text articles were reviewed and of these, nine studies (across ten publications with a total of 363 participants) were deemed suitable for inclusion. Heterogeneity was considerable between studies, with variability in study design, style and delivery of intervention, and follow-up times. Small sample sizes were common and attrition was high. Some studies modified aspects of CBTi for use in shift workers, while others were limited to psycho-education as part of larger intervention studies. Mean differences (MD) pre and post CBTi were modest for both the insomnia severity index (ISI; MD: -3.08, 95% CI: -4.39, -1.76) and the Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI; MD: -2.38, 95% CI: -3.55, -1.21). Neither difference was of a magnitude considered to reflect a clinically significant improvement. Tailored approaches to CBTi are needed for shift workers to improve efficacy, ideally including co-production with workers to ensure interventions meet this population's needs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.smrv.2022.101716

Cites

54 of 54 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
Reynolds, A. C., Sweetman, A., Crowther, M. E., Paterson, J. L., Scott, H., Lechat, B., Wanstall, S. E., Brown, B. W., Lovato, N., Adams, R. J., & Eastwood, P. R.
Affiliations
Flinders University (AU)
Venue
Sleep Medicine Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-02
Volume
67
Pages
101716
ISSN
1087-0792 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4309762012
Cited by
43
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 10
FWCI
1.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Sleep Medicine Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Murdoch University Research Portal (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychological Treatments and Assessments
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia, shift work, insomnia, treatment efficacy, Insomnia Severity Index, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, personalized interventions, co-production, psychoeducation
MeSH terms
Humans, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Treatment Outcome

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