ArticleBritish journal of health psychology2026
'Better sleep, better wellbeing': Qualitative process evaluation of a hybrid, digital cognitive behavioural therapy programme for employees with sleep and emotion regulation problems.
Article in British journal of health psychology, 2026. 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.
- 'Better sleep, better wellbeing': Qualitative process evaluation of a hybrid, digital cognitive behavioural therapy programme for employees with sleep and emotion regulation problems.British journal of health psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSleep and mental health problems are common across the working adult population. This process evaluation provides insight into the experiences of employees who took part in a digital intervention trial: Supporting Employees with Insomnia and Emotional Regulation Problems (SLEEP). The programme combined digital CBT for insomnia with emotion regulation. Digital content was supported by remote therapy. The objectives of this process evaluation were to explore participants' experiences of the intervention, and identify how the intervention achieved change.
methodsTwenty-one semi-structured interviews were conducted using videoconferencing. A stratified sample of participants from within each of five cohorts of the SLEEP trial was interviewed. Thematic analysis utilized a collaborative codebook and framework approach. To conceptualize mechanisms of change, behaviour change techniques were retrospectively coded onto participant interview data.
resultsAn overarching theme: 'Better sleep, better wellbeing' was generated, with three interlinking themes conceptualizing the process by which positive changes to sleep and wellbeing were achieved. These were: 'Procedure: The value of therapy sessions versus digital-only', 'Context: Working on mental health from home during COVID-19', and 'Mechanisms: Practice, feedback and problem solving.'
conclusionsParticipants' experiences of SLEEP were predominantly positive and suggested a spillover effect of improved sleep on overall wellbeing. Triangulation of quantitative outcomes showed congruent improvements. Maintaining therapist contact to facilitate behaviour change throughout the programme was important. Furthermore, providing a private space for therapist calls was essential to facilitate the intervention in the workplace; an important insight for the development of digital mental health interventions intended for the workplace.
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.