SynthesisSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2023
Comparative efficacy of hypnotics in young and middle-aged adults with insomnia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
OBJECTIVE/
backgroundInsomnia is highly prevalent in modern society. However, the hierarchical selection of hypnotics in young and middle-aged adults with insomnia remains unclear. We aimed to compare the efficacy and daytime drowsiness associated with different hypnotics for treating insomnia in young and middle-aged adults.
methodsWe searched Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses A&I databases from inception until December 15, 2021. We also manually searched reference lists and relevant publications. The literature search, data collection, and risk of bias evaluation were all carried out separately by pairs of reviewers. We included randomized control trials (RCTs) that compared hypnotics approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The R and Stata software were both used to perform the meta-analysis.
resultsIn total, 117 RCTs comprising 22,508 participants with the age of 18 to 65 years were included. Assessment of the efficacy of the hypnotics and adverse events (drowsiness) revealed that zolpidem improved all objective sleep parameters (oTST, oSOL, oWASO, and oSE), zopiclone increased oTST and oSE and reduced oSOL, and daridorexant increased oTST and reduced oWASO. Regarding subjective sleep outcomes, zolpidem exhibited beneficial effects on sTST, sSOL, and sWASO. Zaleplon reduced sSOL, and zopiclone was the recommended hypnotic for improving SQ. Zolpidem was associated with drowsiness effect (odds ratio = 1.82; 95% confidence interval = 1.25 to 2.65). The results of sensitivity analysis remained unchanged after the exclusion of studies reporting long-term effects.
conclusionZolpidem is recommended for managing sleep-onset insomnia and sleep maintenance insomnia but should be used with caution because of daytime drowsiness effects. Daridorexant is recommended as a promising agent for managing sleep maintenance insomnia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.