CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 158Sleep and related disordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cognitive behaviour therapy for primary insomnia: Can we rest yet?

Harvey, Allison G, Tang, Nicole K.Y·2003·Sleep Medicine Reviews
DOI 10.1053/smrv.2002.0266
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for chronic insomnia has been a topic of interest to researchers and clinicians for over forty years. Investment in this area has paid off. Two meta-analyses and one major review by the Standards of Practice Committee of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine have concluded, beyond doubt, that CBT is effective in the treatment of primary insomnia. In this paper we argue that it is timely to raise new questions of CBT for insomnia: namely, is there still room for improvement? and can we rest yet? Whilst significant progress has been made we argue that the field is not, as yet, at a point where patients can be offered a maximally effective psychological treatment. Two lines of argument are developed to support this conclusion. First, it is noted that whilst the effect size for CBT for insomnia is moderate, it is lower than the effect sizes reported for CBT for a range of other psychological disorders. Second, it is suggested that the large literature outlining optimal procedures for conducting randomised controlled trials (RCTs) need to be more fully adopted by research workers in this field. Directions for future research are outlined including (1) guidelines for improved RCT methodology and (2) suggestions for developing empirically grounded treatments.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1053/smrv.2002.0266

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 158

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Harvey, A. G., & Tang, N. K. Y.
Affiliations
University of Oxford (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Sleep Medicine Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-06
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
237-262
ISSN
1087-0792 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1053/smrv.2002.0266
OpenAlex
W2171860213
Cited by
158
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Sleep Medicine Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
cognitive behavioral therapy, primary insomnia, chronic insomnia, treatment effectiveness, effect size
MeSH terms
Humans, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

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