Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33172953›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Treating sleep problems in young people at ultra-high-risk of psychosis: study protocol for a single-blind parallel group randomised controlled feasibility trial (SleepWell).

Felicity Waite, Thomas Kabir, Louise Johns, Jill Mollison, Apostolos Tsiachristas, Ariane Petit, Emma Černis, Daniel Maughan, Daniel Freeman

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A Systematic Review of the Reporting Quality of Observational Studies That Use Mediation Analyses.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Felicity WaiteDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK felicity.waite@psych.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-2749-1386
Thomas KabirThe McPin Foundation, London, UK.
Louise JohnsDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jill MollisonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Apostolos TsiachristasHealth Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.
Ariane PetitDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Emma ČernisDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Daniel MaughanOxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, Oxfordshire, UK.
Daniel FreemanDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2541-2197
Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBMcPin Foundation · GB

Funding

Department of Health NIHR200481Department of Health RP-2014-05-003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEffective interventions, targeting key contributory causal factors, are needed to prevent the emergence of severe mental health problems in young people. Insomnia is a common clinical issue that is problematic in its own right but that also leads to the development and persistence of psychotic experiences. The implication is that treating sleep problems may prevent the onset of psychosis. We collected initial case series data with 12 young people at ultra-high-risk of psychosis. Post-intervention, there were improvements in sleep, depression and psychotic experiences. Now we test the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial, with a clinical aim to treat sleep problems and hence reduce depression, psychotic experiences, and prevent transition to psychosis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A randomised controlled feasibility trial will be conducted. Forty patients aged 14 to 25 years who are at ultra-high-risk of psychosis and have sleep disturbance will be recruited from National Health Service (NHS) mental health services. Participants will be randomised to receive either a novel, targeted, youth-focussed sleep intervention in addition to usual care or usual care alone. Assessor-blinded assessments will be conducted at baseline, 3 months (post-intervention) and 9 months (follow-up). The eight-session psychological intervention will target the key mechanisms which disrupt sleep: circadian rhythm irregularities, low sleep pressure, and hyperarousal. To gain an in-depth understanding of participants' views on the acceptability of the intervention and study procedures, 16 participants (n=10 intervention, n=6 control) will take part in qualitative interviews. Analyses will focus on feasibility outcomes (recruitment, retention, and treatment uptake rates) and provide initial CI estimates of intervention effects. Thematic analysis of the qualitative interviews will assess the acceptability of the intervention and trial procedures. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has received ethical approval from the NHS Health Research Authority. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and lay networks. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN85601537.

Indexed as

Sleep Wake DisordersAdolescentAdultFeasibility StudiesHumansProspective StudiesPsychotic DisordersQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSingle-Blind MethodState MedicineYoung Adultadult psychiatrychild & adolescent psychiatryclinical trialsmental healthschizophrenia & psychotic disorderssleep medicine

Identifiers

PMID33172953
PMCPMC7656948
OpenAlexW3093928249

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.