SynthesisBMC medicine2026
The effectiveness of digital therapeutics in improving sleep quality: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInsomnia is a prevalent global sleep disorder. Digital therapeutics, delivered via online platforms, offer novel intervention options. However, existing systematic reviews largely focus on validating individual digital therapeutics, with limited comparative evidence across different types within a unified network. This network meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of various digital therapeutics on sleep quality, thereby providing evidence-based guidance for clinical decision-making in insomnia management.
methodsPubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched and included eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Outcomes included the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), sleep diary and objective sleep parameters. Sleep diary parameters included subjective total sleep time (sTST), subjective wake after sleep onset (sWASO), subjective sleep onset latency (sSOL), and subjective sleep efficiency (sSE); objective sleep parameters included total sleep time (TST), wake after sleep onset (WASO), sleep efficiency (SE), and sleep onset latency (SOL). Furthermore, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was employed to evaluate the clinical relevance of all outcomes.
resultsA total of 96 RCTs comprising 18,419 participants were included, assessing 6 digital therapeutics: digital cognitive behavioral therapy (dCBT), digital brief behavioral therapy (dBBT), digital mindfulness-based therapy (dMBT), circadian rhythm support (CRS), virtual reality (VR), and tele-neurofeedback (NFB). Quality assessment of the included studies revealed that 2 low risk, 79 some concerns, 15 high risk. Network meta-analysis indicated that, compared with control treatment (CT), dCBT likely resulted in a significant decrease in ISI score (MD: -4.24 points, 95% CI: -4.83 to - 3.65; moderate-certainty evidence), a reduction in PSQI score (MD: -2.28 points, 95% CI: -2.88 to - 1.68; low-certainty evidence), shortened sSOL (MD: -12.57 min, 95% CI: -15.14 to - 10.00; low-certainty evidence), improved sSE (MD: 7.27%, 95% CI: 5.77 to 8.77; low-certainty evidence), and reduced sWASO (MD: -17.19 min, 95% CI: -20.96 to - 13.41; low-certainty evidence). dMBT significantly reduced ISI score (MD: -2.28 points, 95% CI: -4.00 to - 0.55; low-certainty evidence) and shortened SOL (MD: -7.96 min, 95% CI: -15.50 to - 0.42; moderate-certainty evidence). Based on an inconsistency model, VR substantially reduced WASO (MD: -13.38 min, 95% CI: -24.40 to - 2.36; moderate-certainty evidence). Of these findings, only dCBT reached the MCID for ISI improvement. NFB, dBBT, and CRS did not demonstrate statistically significant effects relative to CT for any of the outcomes. Given the constraints in the number of studies and sample sizes, the findings derived from objective outcomes warrant cautious interpretation.
conclusionsDigital therapeutics constitute a promising intervention for enhancing sleep quality. dCBT optimally reduces insomnia severity; other outcomes are statistically significant but fail to reach the MCID, leaving their clinical significance uncertain. Moreover, the majority of effect estimates derived from head-to-head comparisons among different digital therapeutics remain insufficiently precise. Future studies are warranted to confirm and expand upon these findings through large-scale, high-quality RCTs.
trial registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251269932.
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.