TY - JOUR
T1 - Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Insomnia: state of the science or a stated science?
AU - Ellis, Jason
AU - Barclay, Nicola
N1 - Published online before print.
PMID: 24969666
PY - 2014/8
Y1 - 2014/8
N2 - Even a cursory glance over the literature will tell you that Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) is a well-researched intervention. With a myriad of reviews and meta-analyses to draw upon, we can also say with a great deal of confidence that CBT-I is largely effective, efficacious, and durable [1]. In fact CBT-I has long been considered the first line treatment for chronic insomnia among several international organizations (e.g. National Institutes of Health, British Association for Psychopharmacology). What’s more, CBT-I has been shown effective for insomnia comorbid with a variety of physical and psychiatric conditions, and appears to be at least comparable to pharmacotherapy in the short-term and potentially superior in the longer term [2], [3] and [4]. With such an abundance of evidence, one question remains – is there a need for more CBT-I studies? The answer is most definitely yes, although with some qualification. To determine the future of this ‘much stated science’ we must ask ourselves what we know about CBT-I, good and bad, and what we need know to make it even better.
AB - Even a cursory glance over the literature will tell you that Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) is a well-researched intervention. With a myriad of reviews and meta-analyses to draw upon, we can also say with a great deal of confidence that CBT-I is largely effective, efficacious, and durable [1]. In fact CBT-I has long been considered the first line treatment for chronic insomnia among several international organizations (e.g. National Institutes of Health, British Association for Psychopharmacology). What’s more, CBT-I has been shown effective for insomnia comorbid with a variety of physical and psychiatric conditions, and appears to be at least comparable to pharmacotherapy in the short-term and potentially superior in the longer term [2], [3] and [4]. With such an abundance of evidence, one question remains – is there a need for more CBT-I studies? The answer is most definitely yes, although with some qualification. To determine the future of this ‘much stated science’ we must ask ourselves what we know about CBT-I, good and bad, and what we need know to make it even better.
UR - http://www.sleep-journal.com/article/S1389-9457(14)00169-5/abstract
U2 - 10.1016/j.sleep.2014.04.008
DO - 10.1016/j.sleep.2014.04.008
M3 - Article
SN - 1389-9457
SN - 1878-5506
VL - 15
SP - 849
EP - 850
JO - Sleep Medicine
JF - Sleep Medicine
IS - 8
ER -