zolpidem

• infection risk

  increases, p = 0.00001

  risk ratio = 1.44, 95% confidence interval 1.25-1.64, p < 0.00001

  PMID:19968019 · one of two readings recorded this

• infection risk

  increases

  Subanalyses for individual drugs indicated that eszopiclone and zolpidem individually were associated with reported infections

  PMID:19968019 · one of two readings recorded this

• participants with infection, event counts

  increases

  606 in the hypnotics groups and 200 in the placebo groups were reported to develop some kind of infection

  PMID:19968019 · one of two readings recorded this

• reported infections (any kind) in hypnotic versus placebo groups in parallel controlled trials; zolpidem sub-analysis

  increases

  Not recorded as a finding: no estimate is reported anywhere

  Subanalyses for individual drugs indicated that eszopiclone and zolpidem individually were associated with reported infections.

  PMID:19968019 · one of two readings recorded this

• fatigue (0–10 NRS)

  no effect, p = 0.56, n = 49

  Z-drugs with analgesic medicines versus the same analgesic medicines alone | Immediate | 49 (22) (24) | Fatigue (0–10 NRS) | − 0.59 | − 0.59 to 0.89 | p = 0.56

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• fatigue (0–10 NRS)

  no effect, p = 0.25, n = 70

  Short-term | 70 (22) (25) | Fatigue (0–10 NRS) | 0.29 | − 0.21 to 0.78 | p = 0.25

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• fatigue (0–100 VAS)

  no effect, p = 0.3, n = 121

  Melatonin versus placebo | Immediate | 121 (31) | Fatigue (0–100 VAS) | − 0.40 | − 1.16 to 0.36 | p = 0.30

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• general wellbeing (0–100 VAS)

  no effect, p = 0.81, n = 121

  Immediate | 121 (31) | General wellbeing (0–100 VAS) | − 0.10 | − 0.91 to 0.71 | p = 0.81

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• opioid consumption

  no effect, p = 0.2

  the effect of intravenous lorazepam 1 mg (4 times a day) was not associated with opioid consumption (measured as the number of milligrammes of fentanyl consumed) compared to placebo [WMD 0.20, CI − 0.10 to 0.50, p = 0.20]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• opioid consumption

  no effect, p = 0.16

  the effect of an infusion of midazolam (0.125 mg/kg or 0.075/kg) was not associated with opioid consumption (measured as the number of milligrammes of morphine consumed) compared to placebo [WMD − 20.71, CI − 49.63 to 8.22, p = 0.16]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• opioid consumption

  no effect

  oral zolpidem 5/10 mg (taken at night) with other analgesic medicines was not associated with opioid consumption (measured as the number of milligrammes of morphine consumed) compared to the same analgesic medicines alone [WMD − 1.00, CI − 22.98 to 20.98, p = − 0.93]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• opioid consumption

  decreases, p = 0.01

  the effect of oral zolpidem 5 mg (at night for 14 nights) with other analgesic medicines significantly decreased opioid consumption (measured as the number of milligrammes of morphine consumed) compared to the same analgesic medicines [WMD − 116.90, CI − 131.88 to − 101.92, p <.01]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• opioid consumption

  decreases, p = 0.03

  the effect of oral zolpidem (taken at night for seven nights) with other analgesic medicines significantly decreased opioid consumption (measured hydrocodone/acetaminophen bitartrate consumed) compared to the same analgesics medicines alone [WMD − 3.04, CI − 5.73 to − 0.35, p = 0.03]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity, all hypnotics versus placebo

  no effect, p = 0.19

  Overall, the effect of hypnotic medicines compared to placebo on pain intensity was not significant [WMD = − 0.29, CI − 0.98 to 0.39, p = 0.19]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity, hypnotics versus morphine

  no effect, p = 0.33

  Hypnotic medicines were not more effective at decreasing pain intensity compared to morphine [WMD = 0.68, CI − 0.70 to 2.05, p = 0.33]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity, hypnotics with analgesics versus analgesics alone

  decreases, p = 0.01

  Hypnotic medicines with analgesic medicines were significantly more effective at decreasing pain intensity than the same analgesics alone [WMD = − 2.14, CI − 3.52 to − 0.76, p < 0.01]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity, infusion route

  no effect, p = 0.43

  Hypnotics were not more effective at decreasing pain intensity when delivered via an infusion [WMD = 0.23, CI − 0.34 to 0.81, p = 0.43]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity, oral route

  decreases, p = 0.02

  Hypnotic medicines were significantly more effective at decreasing pain intensity when delivered orally [WMD = − 0.85, CI − 1.58 to − 0.12, p = 0.02]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity over time

  increases, p = 0.01

  Lorazepam | WMD 1.00 CI 0.88 to 1.12 p value < 0.01 | n/a | n/a | n/a

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity over time

  increases, p = 0.01

  Melatonin | WMD 1.09 CI 0.77 to 1.40 p value < 0.01 | WMD 0.50 CI 0.18 to 0.82 p value < 0.01 | n/a | n/a

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity over time

  increases, p = 0.01

  Melatonin | WMD 1.09 CI 0.77 to 1.40 p value < 0.01 | WMD 0.50 CI 0.18 to 0.82 p value < 0.01 | n/a | n/a

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity over time

  decreases, p = 0.01

  Midazolam | WMD − 0.32 CI − 0.38 to − 0.27 p value < 0.01 | WMD 0.20 CI − 0.14 to 0.54 p value < 0.01 | WMD 1.39 CI 1.05 to 1.72 p value < 0.01 | n/a

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity over time

  unclear, p = 0.01

  Midazolam | WMD − 0.32 CI − 0.38 to − 0.27 p value < 0.01 | WMD 0.20 CI − 0.14 to 0.54 p value < 0.01 | WMD 1.39 CI 1.05 to 1.72 p value < 0.01 | n/a

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity over time

  increases, p = 0.01

  Midazolam | WMD − 0.32 CI − 0.38 to − 0.27 p value < 0.01 | WMD 0.20 CI − 0.14 to 0.54 p value < 0.01 | WMD 1.39 CI 1.05 to 1.72 p value < 0.01 | n/a

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity over time

  no effect, p = 0.01

  Zolpidem | WMD − 0.1 CI − 0.39 to 0.19 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 0.3 CI − 0.38 to − 0.22 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 1.49 CI − 1.63 to − 1.34 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 1.09 CI − 1.12 to − 1.06 p value < 0.01

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity over time

  decreases, p = 0.01

  Zolpidem | WMD − 0.1 CI − 0.39 to 0.19 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 0.3 CI − 0.38 to − 0.22 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 1.49 CI − 1.63 to − 1.34 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 1.09 CI − 1.12 to − 1.06 p value < 0.01

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity over time

  decreases, p = 0.01

  Zolpidem | WMD − 0.1 CI − 0.39 to 0.19 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 0.3 CI − 0.38 to − 0.22 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 1.49 CI − 1.63 to − 1.34 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 1.09 CI − 1.12 to − 1.06 p value < 0.01

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity over time

  decreases, p = 0.01

  Zolpidem | WMD − 0.1 CI − 0.39 to 0.19 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 0.3 CI − 0.38 to − 0.22 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 1.49 CI − 1.63 to − 1.34 p value < 0.01 | WMD − 1.09 CI − 1.12 to − 1.06 p value < 0.01

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity up to 72 h, non-benzodiazepines with other analgesics

  no effect, p = 0.14

  There was no effect of non-benzodiazepines with other analgesics on pain intensity up to 72 h postoperatively [WMD − 0.71, CI − 1.67 to 0.24, p = 0.14]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  increases, p = 0.01

  the effect of intravenous lorazepam 1 mg (4 times a day) was significantly less effective on pain intensity compared to placebo [WMD 1.00, CI 0.22 to 1.78, p ≤.01]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  no effect, p = 1

  the effect of an infusion of midazolam (0.125 mg/kg or 0.075/kg) on pain intensity compared to placebo was not significant [WMD − 0.00, CI − 0.29 to 0.29, p = 1.00]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  decreases, p = 0.01

  the effect of oral diazepam, 4 mg (3 times a day) with intramuscular pethidine and prochlorperazine, or oral dextropropoxyphene and paracetamol was significantly more effective on pain intensity compared to the same analgesic medicines alone [WMD − 4.0, CI − 5.55 to − 2.45, p ≤.01]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  no effect, p = 0.21

  the effect of oral diazepam 5 mg (3 times a day, for 3 days) with oral promethazine, pethidine and baclofen on pain intensity compared with promethazine and pethidine was not significant [WMD − 0.14, CI − 0.84 to 1.21, p = 0.21]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  no effect, p = 0.78

  the effect of oral melatonin 5 mg (taken at night for three nights) on pain intensity compared to placebo was not significant [WMD 0.10, CI − 0.61 to 0.81, p = 0.78]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  no effect, p = 0.38

  the effect of oral zolpidem 5/10 mg (taken at night) with other analgesic medicines compared to the same analgesic medicines alone on pain intensity was not significant [WMD − 0.25, CI − 0.81 to 0.31, p = 0.38]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  decreases, p = 0.01

  the effect of oral zolpidem 5 mg (taken at night for 14 nights) with other analgesic medicines significantly decreased pain intensity compared to the same analgesic medicines alone [WMD − 0.90, CI − 1.43 to − 0.37, p ≤.01]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  decreases, p = 0.01

  the effect of oral zolpidem (taken at night for seven nights) with other analgesic medicines significantly decreased pain intensity compared to the same analgesic medicines alone [WMD − 1.06, CI − 1.48 to − 0.64, p ≤.01]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  unclear, p = 0.01

  the effect of intramuscular diazepam 10 mg (4 times a day) on pain intensity compared to intramuscular morphine 10 mg (4 times a day) was not significant [WMD 2.00, CI 1.53 to 2.47, p ≤.01]

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  no effect, p = 0.12

  immediate WMD − 0.70, CI − 1.59 to 0.19, p = 0.12

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• pain intensity

  no effect, p = 0.07

  short-term WMD − 0.65, CI − 1.35 to 0.05, p = 0.07

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• sleep efficiency (PSG)

  unclear, p = 0.01, n = 141

  Immediate | 141 (28) | Sleep efficiency (PSG) | − 0.86 | 0.51 to 1.20 | p ≤.01

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• sleep quality (0–10 NRS)

  unclear, p = 0.01, n = 20

  Z-drugs in with analgesic medicines versus the same analgesic medicines alone | Immediate | 20 (24) | Sleep quality (0–10 NRS) | − 1.60 | − 2.91 to − 0.3 | p ≤.01

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• sleep quality (0–100 VAS)

  unclear, p = 0.01, n = 344

  Benzodiazepines versus placebo | Immediate | 344 (23) (30) | Sleep quality (0–100 VAS) | 1.14 | 1.63 to 0.65 | p <.01

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• sleep quality (0–100 VAS)

  no effect, p = 0.5, n = 250

  Short-term | 250 (23) | Sleep quality (0–100 VAS) | 0.60 | 0 to 1.20 | p = 0.5

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• sleep quality (0–100 VAS)

  no effect, p = 0.51, n = 121

  Short-term | 121 (31) | Sleep quality (0–100 VAS) | − 0.09 | − 0.27 to 0.45 | p = 0.51

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• sleep quality (Richards Campbell Questionnaire)

  no effect, p = 0.32, n = 24

  Melatonin versus placebo | Short-term | 24 (35) | Sleep quality (Richards Campbell Questionnaire) | − 0.09 | − 0.28 to 0.09 | p = 0.32

  PMID:32883342 · one of two readings recorded this

• cumulative time in long (over 6 min) and short night-time wake bouts, polysomnography, zolpidem 10 mg as active reference versus placebo (phase II study, 60 per arm); also odds of having long wake bouts

  no effect

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  The zolpidem group did not significantly differ from placebo in reducing the time spent in long and short wake bouts on Day 1/2 and on Day 28/29.

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• cumulative time in long wake bouts (> 6 min)

  decreases, p = 0.001

  significant reductions in cumulative time spent in long wake bouts compared with placebo after 1 and 3 months (p < 0.001)

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• cumulative time in long wake bouts (> 6 min)

  decreases, p = 0.01

  mean cumulative duration 31.5 vs 59.7 min at Month 1; and 31.3 vs 54.8 min at Month 3; both p < 0.01

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• cumulative time in long wake bouts (> 6 min)

  decreases, p = 0.01

  mean cumulative duration 31.5 vs 59.7 min at Month 1; and 31.3 vs 54.8 min at Month 3; both p < 0.01

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• cumulative time in long wake bouts (> 6 min)

  long wake bouts contributed less to the cumulative wake time (17.7 min) than short wake bouts (30.8 min) on Day 1/2

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• cumulative time in short wake bouts (<= 2 min, Svetnik threshold)

  increases

  (mean cumulative duration 22.9 min) compared with the placebo group (mean cumulative duration 19.1 min) at Day 28/29

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• cumulative time in short wake bouts (<= 6 min)

  increases, p = 0.01

  significant increases in time spent in short wake bouts compared with placebo after 1 month (p < 0.01) and 3 months (p < 0.05)

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• cumulative time in short wake bouts (<= 6 min)

  increases, p = 0.05

  significant increases in time spent in short wake bouts compared with placebo after 1 month (p < 0.01) and 3 months (p < 0.05)

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• cumulative time in short wake bouts (<= 6 min)

  long wake bouts contributed less to the cumulative wake time (17.7 min) than short wake bouts (30.8 min) on Day 1/2

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• derived duration of perceived awakenings (long/short wake bout threshold)

  n = 924

  Overall—Age: < 65 years (N = 924) | 6.57 | 6.24–6.91

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• derived duration of perceived awakenings (long/short wake bout threshold)

  n = 358

  Phase II study—Age: < 65 years (n = 358) | 6.38 | 5.89–6.91

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• derived duration of perceived awakenings (long/short wake bout threshold)

  n = 566

  Phase III study—Age: < 65 years (n = 566) | 6.69 | 6.26–7.15

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• IDSIQ sleepiness domain score change per 50-min decrease in long wake bouts

  decreases

  a 50-min decrease in cumulative long wake bout duration with daridorexant 50 mg was associated with a 1.65-point improvement in IDSIQ sleepiness domain score

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• IDSIQ sleepiness slope vs change in long wake bout time

  larger slope value for daridorexant 50 mg compared with placebo at Month 1 (0.020 vs 0.016) and at Month 3 (0.033 vs 0.023)

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• IDSIQ sleepiness slope vs change in long wake bout time

  larger slope value for daridorexant 50 mg compared with placebo at Month 1 (0.020 vs 0.016) and at Month 3 (0.033 vs 0.023)

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• IDSIQ sleepiness slope vs change in short wake bout time

  slope values for daridorexant 50 mg and placebo at Month 1: 0.014 and 0.015, respectively, and at Month 3: 0.012 and − 0.010, respectively

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• IDSIQ sleepiness slope vs change in short wake bout time

  slope values for daridorexant 50 mg and placebo at Month 1: 0.014 and 0.015, respectively, and at Month 3: 0.012 and − 0.010, respectively

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• mean cumulative wake time decrease

  decreases

  the decrease in wake time with daridorexant 50 mg was 45.5 min compared with baseline, with a placebo-corrected decrease of 26 min

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• phase II dose-response in subjective total sleep time

  increases, p = 0.006

  a significant dose-dependent increase in subjective TST (sTST) through Week 4 was also observed (p = 0.006)

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 1st night

  decreases

  Month 1 | 1st night | 244/297 (82.15) | 279/297 (93.94) | − 11.78 | 3.44** | [1.96–6.05]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 1st night

  decreases

  Month 3 | 1st night | 236/288 (81.94) | 260/282 (92.20) | − 10.25 | 2.64* | [1.56–4.47]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 1st night

  decreases

  Day 1/2 | 1st night | 35/60 (58.33) | 51/60 (85.00) | − 26.67 | 4.11** | [1.70–9.92]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 1st night

  decreases

  Month 1 | 1st night | 247/305 (80.98) | 279/297 (93.94) | − 12.96 | 3.68** | [2.10–6.46]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 1st night

  decreases

  Month 3 | 1st night | 209/287 (72.82) | 260/282 (92.20) | − 19.38 | 4.41** | [2.66–7.33]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 1st night

  no effect

  Day 1/2 | 1st night | 46/60 (76.67) | 51/60 (85.00) | − 8.33 | 1.73 | [0.68–4.41]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 1st night

  no effect

  Baseline | 1st night | 58/60 (96.67) | 58/60 (96.67) | 0.00

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 1st night

  decreases

  Day 1/2 | 1st night | 35/60 (58.33) | 46/60 (76.67) | − 18.33 | 2.37* | [1.07–5.24]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 1st night

  no effect

  Baseline | 1st night | 59/61 (96.72) | 58/60 (96.67) | 0.05

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 2nd night

  no effect

  2nd night | 252/297 (84.85) | 269/300 (89.67) | − 4.82 | 1.52 | [0.93–2.48]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 2nd night

  decreases

  2nd night | 219/289 (75.78) | 251/284 (88.38) | − 12.60 | 2.44** | [1.56–3.82]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 2nd night

  no effect

  2nd night | 36/61 (59.02) | 44/59 (74.58) | − 15.56 | 2.02 | [0.92–4.42]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 2nd night

  no effect

  2nd night | 58/61 (95.08) | 58/60 (96.67) | − 1.58

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 2nd night

  decreases

  2nd night | 229/302 (75.83) | 269/300 (89.67) | − 13.84 | 2.78** | [1.76–4.39]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 2nd night

  decreases

  2nd night | 213/284 (75.00) | 251/284 (88.38) | − 13.38 | 2.53** | [1.61–3.95]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 2nd night

  no effect

  2nd night | 52/60 (86.67) | 44/59 (74.58) | 12.09 | 0.42 | [0.16–1.10]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 2nd night

  no effect

  2nd night | 56/60 (93.33) | 58/60 (96.67) | − 3.33

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 2nd night

  decreases

  2nd night | 36/61 (59.02) | 52/60 (86.67) | − 27.65 | 4.80*** | [1.92–12.02]

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• subjects with long wake bouts (> 6 min), 2nd night

  no effect

  2nd night | 58/61 (95.08) | 56/60 (93.33) | 1.75

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• time awake in wake bouts > 6 min, Day 1/2 onward

  decreases, p = 0.001

  significantly lower in subjects treated with daridorexant 50 mg compared with placebo (p < 0.001) and with zolpidem 10 mg (p < 0.01)

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• time awake in wake bouts > 6 min, Day 1/2 onward

  decreases, p = 0.01

  significantly lower in subjects treated with daridorexant 50 mg compared with placebo (p < 0.001) and with zolpidem 10 mg (p < 0.01)

  PMID:37477771 · one of two readings recorded this

• Insomnia Severity Index improvement during treatment

  decreases, p = 0.05, n = 127

  scores on the ISI show self-reported improvements in sleep for both groups during treatment (p < 0.05)

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• medication adherence by urine zolpidem testing

  Quantitative urine zolpidem testing revealed that only 53 % of participants in the zolpidem-XR group were adherent

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• medication adherence rate

  increases, n = 20

  increased the adherence rate to 92 % for the final 20 participants (11 zolpidem, 9 placebo)

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• polysomnographic total sleep time and PSQI global score in treatment-seeking adults with cannabis use disorder, zolpidem-XR 12.5 mg nightly versus placebo for 10 weeks plus taper (both arms received behavioural therapy and contingency management); also PSG sleep efficiency (primary sleep outcome), sleep onset latency and urine-confirmed cannabis abstinence

  no effect

  Not recorded as a finding: the supporting sentence never names the compound

  The study observed no significant interactions between treatment condition and study phase, or main effects of treatment condition on total sleep time, time spent in different sleep stages, or sleep continuity as measured by PSG (Table 3).

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• proportion of THC-negative urine specimens by treatment week (creatinine-normalized immunoassay THCCOOH < 50 ng/mL with GC/MS confirmation), primary; sleep efficiency by outpatient polysomnography, co-primary for sleep; extended-release zolpidem 12.5 mg versus placebo for 12 weeks, both arms with computerised MET/CBT and contingency management

  no effect, GEE B = 0.48, SE = 0.41 for treatment condition on proportion of THC-negative urine specimens, p = 0.23

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  The non-piecewise GEE analysis revealed no statistically significant difference between treatment conditions (B = 0.48, SE = 0.41, p = 0.23).

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• proportion of THC-negative urine specimens (primary cannabis use outcome)

  no effect, p = 0.23, n = 127

  The non-piecewise GEE analysis revealed no statistically significant difference between treatment conditions (B = 0.48, SE = 0.41, p = 0.23)

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• PSG sleep efficiency, main effect of time across three treatment phases

  modulates, p = 0.05, n = 127

  A main effect of time was observed at all three phases (Bs = −1.61 to 1.98, SEs = 0.37 to 0.72, ps < 0.05)

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• PSG sleep onset latency

  participants in the zolpidem-XR group had worse sleep onset latency time (average of 39 min) than those in the placebo group (average of 26 min) at baseline

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• PSG sleep onset latency

  increases, n = 21

  sleep onset latency increased from 21 min (SD = 31) at baseline to 73 min (SD = 72) during week 1 in the placebo group (N = 21)

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• PSG sleep onset latency

  decreases, n = 31

  decreased from a mean of 51 min (SD = 63) at baseline to 32 min (SD = 36) during week 1 in the zolpidem-XR group (N = 31)

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• PSG sleep onset latency

  increases, p = 0.05

  In the placebo group, sleep onset latency increased from an average of 26 min (SD = 36) at baseline to 76 min (SD = 103) at week 1 (B = −45.40, SE = 18.75); p < 0.05

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• study retention

  no effect, n = 127

  No significant differences were observed in study retention as a function of treatment condition: (placebo = 49 % vs. zolpidem-XR = 53 %)

  PMID:37802317 · one of two readings recorded this

• adaptive tracking

  no effect, p = 0.101, n = 18

  Adaptive tracking (%) | −3.60 (−4.52, −2.68) p < 0.001 | −0.77 (−1.70, 0.15) p = 0.101 | −2.82 (−3.75, −1.91) p < 0.001 | 16.9 | 13.3 | 16.1

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• adaptive tracking

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Adaptive tracking (%) | −3.60 (−4.52, −2.68) p < 0.001 | −0.77 (−1.70, 0.15) p = 0.101 | −2.82 (−3.75, −1.91) p < 0.001 | 16.9 | 13.3 | 16.1

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• adaptive tracking

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Adaptive tracking (%) | −3.60 (−4.52, −2.68) p < 0.001 | −0.77 (−1.70, 0.15) p = 0.101 | −2.82 (−3.75, −1.91) p < 0.001 | 16.9 | 13.3 | 16.1

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• body sway, absolute difference

  increases, n = 18

  and suvorexant (ED: 34.1 mm

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• body sway, absolute difference

  increases, n = 18

  body sway during quiet standing was significantly increased for both zolpidem (ED: 122.3 mm

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• body sway

  increases, p = 0.017, n = 18

  Body sway (mm) | 35.2% (25.3%, 45.8%) p < 0.001 | 9.8% (1.8%, 18.5%) p = 0.017 | 23.1% (14.1%, 32.8%) p < 0.001 | 347.8 | 470.1 | 381.9

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• body sway

  increases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Body sway (mm) | 35.2% (25.3%, 45.8%) p < 0.001 | 9.8% (1.8%, 18.5%) p = 0.017 | 23.1% (14.1%, 32.8%) p < 0.001 | 347.8 | 470.1 | 381.9

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• body sway

  increases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Body sway (mm) | 35.2% (25.3%, 45.8%) p < 0.001 | 9.8% (1.8%, 18.5%) p = 0.017 | 23.1% (14.1%, 32.8%) p < 0.001 | 347.8 | 470.1 | 381.9

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW 8MWT step length

  no effect, p = 0.392, n = 18

  IWW 8MWT – Step Length (cm) | −2.26 (−3.21, −1.30) p < 0.001 | −0.41 (−1.37, 0.55) p = 0.392 | −1.85 (−2.80, −0.89) p < 0.001 | 69.8 | 67.5 | 69.4

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW 8MWT step length

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  IWW 8MWT – Step Length (cm) | −2.26 (−3.21, −1.30) p < 0.001 | −0.41 (−1.37, 0.55) p = 0.392 | −1.85 (−2.80, −0.89) p < 0.001 | 69.8 | 67.5 | 69.4

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW 8MWT step length

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  IWW 8MWT – Step Length (cm) | −2.26 (−3.21, −1.30) p < 0.001 | −0.41 (−1.37, 0.55) p = 0.392 | −1.85 (−2.80, −0.89) p < 0.001 | 69.8 | 67.5 | 69.4

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW obstacle-avoidance margin, leading limb

  no effect, p = 0.381, n = 18

  IWW OA – Margins Leading Limb (cm) | −0.03 (−0.04, −0.01) p < 0.001 | −0.01 (−0.02, 0.01) p = 0.381 | −0.02 (−0.03, −0.00) p = 0.011 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.11

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW obstacle-avoidance margin, leading limb

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  IWW OA – Margins Leading Limb (cm) | −0.03 (−0.04, −0.01) p < 0.001 | −0.01 (−0.02, 0.01) p = 0.381 | −0.02 (−0.03, −0.00) p = 0.011 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.11

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW obstacle-avoidance margin, leading limb

  decreases, p = 0.011, n = 18

  IWW OA – Margins Leading Limb (cm) | −0.03 (−0.04, −0.01) p < 0.001 | −0.01 (−0.02, 0.01) p = 0.381 | −0.02 (−0.03, −0.00) p = 0.011 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.11

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW tandem-walking mediolateral sway

  no effect, p = 0.116, n = 18

  IWW TW – Sway (cm) | 0.29 (−0.01, 0.60) p = 0.062 | −0.24 (−0.55, 0.06) p = 0.116 | 0.54 (0.23, 0.84) p < 0.001 | 3.13 | 3.42 | 2.89

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW tandem-walking mediolateral sway

  no effect, p = 0.062, n = 18

  IWW TW – Sway (cm) | 0.29 (−0.01, 0.60) p = 0.062 | −0.24 (−0.55, 0.06) p = 0.116 | 0.54 (0.23, 0.84) p < 0.001 | 3.13 | 3.42 | 2.89

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW tandem-walking mediolateral sway

  increases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  IWW TW – Sway (cm) | 0.29 (−0.01, 0.60) p = 0.062 | −0.24 (−0.55, 0.06) p = 0.116 | 0.54 (0.23, 0.84) p < 0.001 | 3.13 | 3.42 | 2.89

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, 8-m walking test

  no effect, p = 0.061, n = 18

  8‐m walking test | −5.56 (−7.77, −3.36) p < 0.001 | −2.11 (−4.32, 0.10) p = 0.061 | −3.45 (−5.68, −1.23) p = 0.003 | 121.4 | 115.8 | 119.3

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, 8-m walking test

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  8‐m walking test | −5.56 (−7.77, −3.36) p < 0.001 | −2.11 (−4.32, 0.10) p = 0.061 | −3.45 (−5.68, −1.23) p = 0.003 | 121.4 | 115.8 | 119.3

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, 8-m walking test

  decreases, p = 0.003, n = 18

  8‐m walking test | −5.56 (−7.77, −3.36) p < 0.001 | −2.11 (−4.32, 0.10) p = 0.061 | −3.45 (−5.68, −1.23) p = 0.003 | 121.4 | 115.8 | 119.3

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, goal-directed stepping

  no effect, p = 0.173, n = 18

  Goal‐directed stepping | −8.12 (−11.14, −5.10) p < 0.001 | −2.07 (−5.09, 0.95) p = 0.173 | −6.05 (−9.08, −3.02) p < 0.001 | 110.8 | 102.7 | 108.7

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, goal-directed stepping

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Goal‐directed stepping | −8.12 (−11.14, −5.10) p < 0.001 | −2.07 (−5.09, 0.95) p = 0.173 | −6.05 (−9.08, −3.02) p < 0.001 | 110.8 | 102.7 | 108.7

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, goal-directed stepping

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Goal‐directed stepping | −8.12 (−11.14, −5.10) p < 0.001 | −2.07 (−5.09, 0.95) p = 0.173 | −6.05 (−9.08, −3.02) p < 0.001 | 110.8 | 102.7 | 108.7

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, obstacle-avoidance

  no effect, p = 0.215, n = 18

  Obstacle‐avoidance | −5.25 (−7.55, −2.96) p < 0.001 | −1.43 (−3.71, 0.86) p = 0.215 | −3.83 (−6.12, −1.53) p = 0.002 | 115.1 | 109.8 | 113.7

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, obstacle-avoidance

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Obstacle‐avoidance | −5.25 (−7.55, −2.96) p < 0.001 | −1.43 (−3.71, 0.86) p = 0.215 | −3.83 (−6.12, −1.53) p = 0.002 | 115.1 | 109.8 | 113.7

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, obstacle-avoidance

  decreases, p = 0.002, n = 18

  Obstacle‐avoidance | −5.25 (−7.55, −2.96) p < 0.001 | −1.43 (−3.71, 0.86) p = 0.215 | −3.83 (−6.12, −1.53) p = 0.002 | 115.1 | 109.8 | 113.7

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, tandem-walking

  no effect, p = 0.475, n = 18

  Tandem‐walking | −9.41 (−13.74, −5.07) p < 0.001 | −1.54 (−5.87, 2.79) p = 0.475 | −7.87 (−12.12, −3.61) p < 0.001 | 103.6 | 94.2 | 102.1

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, tandem-walking

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Tandem‐walking | −9.41 (−13.74, −5.07) p < 0.001 | −1.54 (−5.87, 2.79) p = 0.475 | −7.87 (−12.12, −3.61) p < 0.001 | 103.6 | 94.2 | 102.1

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• IWW walking speed, tandem-walking

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Tandem‐walking | −9.41 (−13.74, −5.07) p < 0.001 | −1.54 (−5.87, 2.79) p = 0.475 | −7.87 (−12.12, −3.61) p < 0.001 | 103.6 | 94.2 | 102.1

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• Timed Up and Go, comfortable pace

  no effect, p = 0.559, n = 18

  Timed‐up and go (s) | 0.68 (0.38, 0.99) p < 0.001 | 0.09 (−0.22, 0.40) p = 0.559 | 0.59 (0.28, 0.90) p < 0.001 | 9.86 | 10.54 | 9.95

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• Timed Up and Go, comfortable pace

  increases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Timed‐up and go (s) | 0.68 (0.38, 0.99) p < 0.001 | 0.09 (−0.22, 0.40) p = 0.559 | 0.59 (0.28, 0.90) p < 0.001 | 9.86 | 10.54 | 9.95

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• Timed Up and Go, comfortable pace

  increases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Timed‐up and go (s) | 0.68 (0.38, 0.99) p < 0.001 | 0.09 (−0.22, 0.40) p = 0.559 | 0.59 (0.28, 0.90) p < 0.001 | 9.86 | 10.54 | 9.95

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• Timed-Up-and-Go completion time at comfortable and fast pace, Interactive Walkway walking speed, adaptive tracking and body sway up to 3 h after zolpidem 5 mg versus placebo in healthy elderly

  increases, ED: 0.68 s, (0.38; 0.99) comfortable pace and ED: 0.43 s (0.26; 0.60) fast pace

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  The TUG (both at comfortable (see Figure 2) and fast speed) increased significantly for zolpidem compared with placebo (ED: 0.68 s, (0.38; 0.99) and ED: 0.43 s (0.26; 0.60), respectively).

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• Timed Up and Go, fast pace

  no effect, p = 0.895, n = 18

  Timed‐up and go fast (s) | 0.43 (0.26, 0.60) p < 0.001 | 0.01 (−0.16, 0.18) p = 0.895 | 0.41 (0.24, 0.59) p < 0.001 | 7.25 | 7.68 | 7.26

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• Timed Up and Go, fast pace

  increases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Timed‐up and go fast (s) | 0.43 (0.26, 0.60) p < 0.001 | 0.01 (−0.16, 0.18) p = 0.895 | 0.41 (0.24, 0.59) p < 0.001 | 7.25 | 7.68 | 7.26

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• Timed Up and Go, fast pace

  increases, p = 0.001, n = 18

  Timed‐up and go fast (s) | 0.43 (0.26, 0.60) p < 0.001 | 0.01 (−0.16, 0.18) p = 0.895 | 0.41 (0.24, 0.59) p < 0.001 | 7.25 | 7.68 | 7.26

  PMID:38978326 · one of two readings recorded this

• 30-day readmission: hospitalization

  no effect, n = 76

  Hospitalization | 14(36.8%) | 19(50.0%)

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• 30-day readmission: not hospitalized

  no effect, p = 0.247, n = 76

  Not hospitalized | 24(63.2%) | 19(50.0%) | 1.339 | 0.247

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• I-FEED postoperative gastrointestinal function score, primary outcome at POD3

  no effect

  Not recorded as a finding: no_outcome_node: no I-FEED score in the list

  As for the I-FEED scores on POD3 and POD7, there was no difference between the two groups.

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• I-FEED score

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 76

  POD1 | 5(2) | 4(1) | -3.257 | 0.001*

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• I-FEED score

  no effect, p = 0.217, n = 76

  POD3 | 5(1) | 4(1) | -1.236 | 0.217

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• I-FEED score

  no effect, p = 0.115, n = 76

  POD7 | 2(0.25) | 2(0) | -1.575 | 0.115

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• length of stay

  no effect, p = 0.497, n = 76

  Length of stay | 16(3.5) | 16(3) | -0.679 | 0.497

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• LSEQ awakening from sleep (AFS)

  no effect, p = 0.113, n = 76

  AFS | 54.47 ± 2.45 | 55.34 ± 2.27 | 1.604 | 0.113

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• LSEQ behavior following wakefulness (BFW)

  no effect, p = 0.502, n = 76

  BFW | 55.000(3.0) | 55.000(4.0) | -0.671 | 0.502

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• LSEQ ease of getting to sleep (GTS)

  increases, n = 76

  GTS | 47.34 ± 4.65 | 74.32 ± 7.18 | 19.433 | 0.000**

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• LSEQ quality of sleep (QOS)

  increases, n = 76

  QOS | 46.16 ± 5.91 | 73.68 ± 7.84 | 17.281 | 0.000**

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• patient satisfaction

  increases, p = 0.008, n = 76

  Patient satisfaction | 8(1) | 9(1) | -2.643 | 0.008*

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• PCIA effective press times

  decreases, n = 76

  PCIA effective press times | 2(1) | 1(1) | -4.435 | 0.000**

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• postoperative complications: none

  no effect, p = 0.761, n = 76

  None | 32(84.2%) | 31(81.6%) | 0.093 | 0.761

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• postoperative sufentanil consumption (24 h)

  decreases, p = 0.046, n = 76

  Sufentanil consumption (ug) | 68.12 ± 8.01 | 64.21 ± 8.78 | 2.027 | 0.046*

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• rescue analgesia

  no effect, p = 0.37, n = 76

  Rescue analgesia | 0(1) | 0(0) | -0.897 | 0.370

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• serum TNF-alpha concentration, ELISA, at T3 24 h after surgery

  decreases

  Not recorded as a finding: the finding sits in a sentence that names Group Z only for the smaller-values direction and carries significance in a following sentence, so no single whole sentence supports it

  At T1, T2, and T3, the TNF-α values in Group Z were smaller than those in Group C.

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• serum TNF-alpha, ELISA, at four perioperative timepoints (T0 to T3)

  decreases, 5.68 ± 1.69 vs 6.99 ± 3.26 pg/mL at T3, p = 0.031

  Not recorded as a finding: Only the T3 (24 h postoperative) difference was significant; the sentence naming the finding does not name the compound or arm and is a single secondary timepoint

  However, the difference was statistically significant only at T3 (5.68 ± 1.69 vs. 6.99 ± 3.26; P = 0.031), and the difference was not statistically significant at the remaining time points.

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• serum TNF-α

  no effect, p = 0.994, n = 76

  T0 (pg/mL) | 4.98 ± 2.62 | 4.99 ± 1.99 | 0.008 | 0.994

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• serum TNF-α

  decreases, p = 0.031, n = 76

  T3 (pg/mL) | 6.99 ± 3.26 | 5.68 ± 1.69 | -2.209 | 0.031*

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• time to first feces

  no effect, p = 0.089, n = 76

  Time to first feces (h) | 97.21 ± 19.34 | 89.76 ± 18.35 | 1.722 | 0.089

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• time to first flatus

  decreases, p = 0.01, n = 76

  Time to first flatus (h) | 74(24.5) | 63.5(22.75) | -2.578 | 0.010*

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• time to first food intake

  decreases, p = 0.021, n = 76

  Time to first intaking (h) | 130(19.25) | 121(16.75) | -2.313 | 0.021*

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• time to first postoperative flatus, patient self-report

  decreases, median 63.5 vs 74 h, p = 0.01

  Not recorded as a finding: no_outcome_node: no gastrointestinal recovery outcome in the list

  According to patient self-report, the median time to first flatus (63.5 [22.75] vs. 74 [24.5], P = 0.010) and the median time to first intaking (121 [16.75] vs. 130 [19.25], P = 0.021) were significantly lower in Group Z than in the control group.

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS-A anxiety on entering operating room

  decreases, n = 76

  VAS-A | 4.000(1.0) | 4.000(1.0) | -3.530 | 0.000**

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS pain at rest

  decreases, p = 0.004, n = 76

  POD1, rest | 3(1) | 2(1) | -2.848 | 0.004*

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS pain at rest

  no effect, p = 0.141, n = 76

  POD3, rest | 2(1) | 1(1) | -1.472 | 0.141

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS pain at rest

  no effect, p = 0.089, n = 76

  POD7, rest | 0.5(1) | 0(1) | -1.699 | 0.089

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS pain during coughing

  decreases, p = 0.015, n = 76

  POD1, coughing | 5(0.25) | 4.5(1) | -2.434 | 0.015*

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS pain during coughing

  decreases, n = 76

  POD3, coughing | 4(1) | 3(1) | -4.338 | 0.000**

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• VAS pain during coughing

  no effect, p = 0.158, n = 76

  POD7, coughing | 3(1) | 2(1) | -1.41 | 0.158

  PMID:39966710 · one of two readings recorded this

• CPAP adherence by treatment sequence

  no effect, p = 0.87, n = 28

  Treatment sequence did not affect CPAP adherence (P = .87)

  PMID:40790926 · one of two readings recorded this

• mean CPAP usage per night and percentage of nights with CPAP use of 4 hours or more, zolpidem 10 mg versus placebo over 1 week in CPAP-naive OSA patients

  no effect, mean difference, 0.18; 95% confidence interval, -0.39 to 0.75

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  The mean CPAP usage per night did not differ significantly between zolpidem and placebo (mean difference, 0.18; 95% confidence interval, -0.39 to 0.75).

  PMID:40790926 · one of two readings recorded this

• mean CPAP usage per night, and percentage of nights with CPAP use of at least 4 hours, during one week of zolpidem 10 mg versus placebo in CPAP-naive patients with obstructive sleep apnea

  no effect, mean difference 0.18, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.75

  Not recorded as a finding: this platform holds no node for the endpoint

  The mean CPAP usage per night did not differ significantly between zolpidem and placebo (mean difference, 0.18; 95% confidence interval, -0.39 to 0.75).

  PMID:40790926 · one of two readings recorded this

• mean CPAP usage per night

  no effect, n = 28

  The mean CPAP usage per night did not differ significantly between zolpidem and placebo (mean difference, 0.18; 95% confidence interval, -0.39 to 0.75)

  PMID:40790926 · one of two readings recorded this

• percentage of nights with CPAP use >= 4 hours

  no effect, n = 28

  The percentage of nights with CPAP use ≥ 4 hours also showed no significant difference (mean difference, 2.60; 95% confidence interval, -5.65 to 10.87)

  PMID:40790926 · one of two readings recorded this

• ESS

  no effect, p = 0.827, n = 59

  ESS | ZS vs. ZP | −0.22 | −2.22, 1.78 | 0.827 | 0.04 | −0.38 | −2.55, 1.80 | 0.731 | 0.07

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ESS

  no effect, p = 0.731, n = 59

  ESS | ZS vs. ZP | −0.22 | −2.22, 1.78 | 0.827 | 0.04 | −0.38 | −2.55, 1.80 | 0.731 | 0.07

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ESS

  no effect, p = 0.854, n = 48

  ESS | ZS vs. ZP | 0.22 | −2.16, 2.59 | 0.854 | 0.04 | −0.13 | −2.45, 2.18 | 0.907 | −0.03

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ESS

  no effect, p = 0.907, n = 48

  ESS | ZS vs. ZP | 0.22 | −2.16, 2.59 | 0.854 | 0.04 | −0.13 | −2.45, 2.18 | 0.907 | −0.03

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ESS

  decreases, p = 0.025, n = 29

  ZP | −1.63 | −3.06, −0.21 | 0.025 | 0.35 | −2.94 | −4.49, −1.40 | < 0.001 | 0.63

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ESS

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 29

  ZP | −1.63 | −3.06, −0.21 | 0.025 | 0.35 | −2.94 | −4.49, −1.40 | < 0.001 | 0.63

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ESS

  decreases, p = 0.01, n = 30

  ZS | −1.85 | −3.25, −0.45 | 0.010 | 0.35 | −3.32 | −4.84, −1.80 | < 0.001 | 0.63

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ESS

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 30

  ZS | −1.85 | −3.25, −0.45 | 0.010 | 0.35 | −3.32 | −4.84, −1.80 | < 0.001 | 0.63

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• GAD-7

  no effect, p = 0.98, n = 59

  GAD-7 | ZS vs. ZP | 0.03 | −2.31, 2.37 | 0.980 | 0.01 | −0.46 | −2.67, 1.74 | 0.677 | 0.10

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• GAD-7

  no effect, p = 0.677, n = 59

  GAD-7 | ZS vs. ZP | 0.03 | −2.31, 2.37 | 0.980 | 0.01 | −0.46 | −2.67, 1.74 | 0.677 | 0.10

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• GAD-7

  no effect, p = 0.948, n = 48

  GAD-7 | ZS vs. ZP | 0.09 | −2.55, 2.72 | 0.948 | 0.02 | 0.05 | −2.40, 2.50 | 0.967 | 0.01

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• GAD-7

  no effect, p = 0.967, n = 48

  GAD-7 | ZS vs. ZP | 0.09 | −2.55, 2.72 | 0.948 | 0.02 | 0.05 | −2.40, 2.50 | 0.967 | 0.01

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• GAD-7

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 29

  ZP | −4.20 | −5.87, −2.53 | < 0.001 | 0.84 | −5.48 | −7.05, −3.90 | < 0.001 | 1.10

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• GAD-7

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 29

  ZP | −4.20 | −5.87, −2.53 | < 0.001 | 0.84 | −5.48 | −7.05, −3.90 | < 0.001 | 1.10

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• GAD-7

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 30

  ZS | −4.17 | −5.81, −2.53 | < 0.001 | 1.06 | −5.94 | −7.49, −4.39 | < 0.001 | 1.51

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• GAD-7

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 30

  ZS | −4.17 | −5.81, −2.53 | < 0.001 | 1.06 | −5.94 | −7.49, −4.39 | < 0.001 | 1.51

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ISI

  no effect, p = 0.471, n = 59

  ISI | ZS vs. ZP | −0.95 | −3.56, 1.67 | 0.471 | 0.24 | −1.68 | −4.49, 1.14 | 0.238 | 0.42

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ISI

  no effect, p = 0.238, n = 59

  ISI | ZS vs. ZP | −0.95 | −3.56, 1.67 | 0.471 | 0.24 | −1.68 | −4.49, 1.14 | 0.238 | 0.42

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ISI

  no effect, p = 0.714, n = 48

  ISI | ZS vs. ZP | 0.53 | −2.36, 3.42 | 0.714 | 0.11 | −0.87 | −4.26, 2.53 | 0.610 | −0.19

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ISI

  no effect, p = 0.61, n = 48

  ISI | ZS vs. ZP | 0.53 | −2.36, 3.42 | 0.714 | 0.11 | −0.87 | −4.26, 2.53 | 0.610 | −0.19

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ISI

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 29

  ZP | −7.16 | −9.03, − 5.3 | < 0.001 | 1.97 | −8.33 | −10.34, − 6.33 | < 0.001 | 2.31

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ISI

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 29

  ZP | −7.16 | −9.03, − 5.3 | < 0.001 | 1.97 | −8.33 | −10.34, − 6.33 | < 0.001 | 2.31

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ISI

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 30

  ZS | −8.11 | −9.94, − 6.28 | < 0.001 | 1.85 | −10.01 | −11.98, − 8.04 | < 0.001 | 2.29

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• ISI

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 30

  ZS | −8.11 | −9.94, − 6.28 | < 0.001 | 1.85 | −10.01 | −11.98, − 8.04 | < 0.001 | 2.29

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• PHQ-9

  no effect, p = 0.893, n = 59

  PHQ-9 | ZS vs. ZP | −0.15 | −2.38, 2.08 | 0.893 | 0.04 | 0.60 | −1.64, 2.84 | 0.591 | 0.16

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• PHQ-9

  no effect, p = 0.591, n = 59

  PHQ-9 | ZS vs. ZP | −0.15 | −2.38, 2.08 | 0.893 | 0.04 | 0.60 | −1.64, 2.84 | 0.591 | 0.16

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• PHQ-9

  no effect, p = 0.905, n = 48

  PHQ-9 | ZS vs. ZP | 0.15 | −2.42, 2.73 | 0.905 | 0.04 | 0.55 | −2.09, 3.19 | 0.679 | 0.12

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• PHQ-9

  no effect, p = 0.679, n = 48

  PHQ-9 | ZS vs. ZP | 0.15 | −2.42, 2.73 | 0.905 | 0.04 | 0.55 | −2.09, 3.19 | 0.679 | 0.12

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• PHQ-9

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 29

  ZP | −6.14 | −7.73, −4.56 | < 0.001 | 1.52 | −8.76 | −10.36, −7.17 | < 0.001 | 2.17

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

• PHQ-9

  decreases, p = 0.001, n = 29

  ZP | −6.14 | −7.73, −4.56 | < 0.001 | 1.52 | −8.76 | −10.36, −7.17 | < 0.001 | 2.17

  PMID:41107798 · one of two readings recorded this

The whole record — 422 rows