Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25902806›Full record

SynthesisSleep2015

Nonpharmacological Treatments of Insomnia for Long-Term Painful Conditions: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Randomized Controlled Trials.

Nicole K Y Tang, S Tanya Lereya, Hayley Boulton, Michelle A Miller, Dieter Wolke, Francesco P Cappuccio

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Sleep, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
11.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

75 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 169 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Efficacy of psychological interventions on sleep in children and adolescents with chronic pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicole K Y TangDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
S Tanya LereyaDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Hayley BoultonDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Michelle A MillerWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Dieter WolkeDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Francesco P CappuccioWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
University of Warwick · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

objectivesInsomnia is a debilitating comorbidity of chronic pain. This study evaluated the effect of nonpharmacological sleep treatments on patient-reported sleep quality, pain, and well-being in people with long-term cancer and non-cancer (e.g., back pain, arthritis, fibromyalgia) pain conditions.

designWe systematically searched Cochrane CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and PsychINFO for relevant studies. Search period was set to inception of these databases to March 2014. Studies were included if they were: original randomized controlled trials (RCTs); testing a nonpharmacological intervention; that targets sleep; in adults; with painful health conditions; that has a control group; includes a measure of sleep quality; and at least one other health and well-being outcome. MEASUREMENT AND

findingsMeans and standard deviations of sleep quality, pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety, physical and psychological functioning were extracted for the sleep treatment and control groups at baseline, posttreatment and final follow-up. Methodological details concerning the treatment, participants, and study design were abstracted to guide heterogeneity and subgroup analyses. Eleven RCTs involving 1,066 participants (mean age 45-61 years) met the criteria for the meta-analysis. There was no systematic evidence of publication bias. Nonpharmacological sleep treatments in chronic pain patients were associated with a large improvement in sleep quality (standardized mean difference = 0.78, 95% Confidence Interval [0.42, 1.13]; P < 0.001), small reduction in pain (0.18 [0, 0.36] P < 0.05), and moderate improvement in fatigue (0.38 [0.08, 0.69]; P < 0.01) at posttreatment. The effects on sleep quality and fatigue were maintained at follow-up (up to 1 year) when a moderate reduction in depression (0.31, [0.09, 0.53]; P < 0.01) was also observed. Both cancer and non-cancer pain patients benefited from nonpharmacological sleep treatments. Face-to-face treatments achieved better outcomes than those delivered over the phone/internet.

conclusionsAlthough the body of evidence was small, nonpharmacological sleep interventions may represent a fruitful avenue for optimizing treatment outcomes in patients with chronic pain. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration: CRD42013004131.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelf ReportAnxietyChronic PainDepressionFatigueHumansNeoplasmsSleepSleep Initiation and Maintenance DisordersTime FactorsTreatment Outcomechronic painhealthinsomniameta-analysisnonpharmacological treatmentsleepsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID25902806
PMCPMC4813361
OpenAlexW1784234967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.