Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17940604›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2007

A televised, web-based randomised trial of an herbal remedy (valerian) for insomnia.

Andrew D Oxman, Signe Flottorp, Kari Håvelsrud, Atle Fretheim, Jan Odgaard-Jensen, Astrid Austvoll-Dahlgren, Cheryl Carling, Ståle Pallesen, Bjørn Bjorvatn

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Clinical Practice Guideline for the Pharmacologic Treatment of Chronic Insomnia in Adults: An American Academy of Sleep Medicine Clinical Practice Guideline.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2017
    Guideline
  3. Internet-based randomized controlled trials: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2013
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Mixture ofNutrients · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Plant Extracts for Sleep Disturbances: A Systematic Review.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Updates on Nutraceutical Sleep Therapeutics and Investigational Research.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2015
    Review
  16. Internet trials: participant experiences and perspectives.BMC medical research methodology · 2012
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Andrew D OxmanNorwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway. oxman@online.no
Signe Flottorp
Kari Håvelsrud
Atle Fretheim
Jan Odgaard-Jensen
Astrid Austvoll-Dahlgren
Cheryl Carling
Ståle Pallesen
Bjørn Bjorvatn

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis trial was conducted as part of a project that aims to enhance public understanding and use of research in decisions about healthcare by enabling viewers to participate in research and to follow the process, through television reports and on the web. Valerian is an herbal over-the-counter drug that is widely used for insomnia. Systematic reviews have found inconsistent and inconclusive results about its effects.

methodsParticipants were recruited through a weekly nationally televised health program in Norway. Enrolment and data collection were over the Internet. 405 participants who were 18 to 75 years old and had insomnia completed a two week diary-keeping run-in period without treatment and were randomised and mailed valerian or placebo tablets for two weeks. All participants and investigators were blind to treatment until after the analysis was completed.

findingsFor the primary outcome of a minimally important improvement in self-reported sleep quality (> or = 0.5 units on a 7 point scale), the difference between the valerian group (29%) and the placebo group (21%) was not statistically significant (difference 7.5%; 95% CI-0.9 to 15.9; p = 0.08). On the global self-assessment question at the end of the treatment period 5.5% (95% CI 0.2 to 10.8) more participants in the valerian group perceived their sleep as better or much better (p = 0.04). There were similar trends favouring the valerian group for night awakenings (difference = 6.0%, 95% CI-0.5 to 12.5) and sleep duration (difference = 7.5%, 95% CI-1.0 to 16.1). There were no serious adverse events and no important or statistically significant differences in minor adverse events.

interpretationBased on this and previous studies, valerian appears to be safe, but with modest beneficial effects at most on insomnia compared to placebo. The combined use of television and the Internet in randomised trials offers opportunities to answer questions about the effects of health care interventions and to improve public understanding and use of randomised trials.

trial registrationControlled-Trials.com ISRCTN72748991.

Indexed as

Plant PreparationsAdolescentAdultAgedHumansInternetMiddle AgedPatient Education as TopicPlacebosPlant ExtractsResearch DesignSleep Initiation and Maintenance DisordersTelevisionTreatment OutcomeValerianPlacebosPlant ExtractsPlant Preparations

Identifiers

PMID17940604
PMCPMC2002515

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.