Cochrane · systematic review · CD010703
Eszopiclone for insomnia
Rösner, S, Englbrecht, C, Wehrle, R, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2018 · Cochrane Library
Common Mental DisordersAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
7
current version
GRADE rated
7
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 3 · 42.9%Moderate 4 · 57.1%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Eszopiclone for insomnia
Population: Patients with insomnia
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Sleep onset latency Participant reports. Scale from 30 to 540 minutes; fewer minutes equalled better outcome; CFB and double‐blind average values included | no estimate extracted | 9 studies · 2890 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Wake time after sleep onset Participant reports. Scale from: 30 to 540 minutes; fewer minutes equalled better outcome; CFB and double‐blind average values included | no estimate extracted | 8 studies · 2295 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Rebound insomnia ‐ sleep onset latency Scale from: 0 to 540 minutes. | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 291 participants | Low |
Rebound insomnia ‐ wake time after sleep onset Scale from: 0 to 540 minutes. | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 291 participants | Low |
Total sleep time Participant reports. Scale from: 300 to 840; more minutes equalled better outcome; CFB and double‐blind average values included | no estimate extracted | 9 studies · 2935 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Next‐day alertness Participant reports. Scale from: 0 to 10 points; higher scores equalled better outcome; CFB and double‐blind average values included | no estimate extracted | 8 studies · 2061 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Serious adverse events (as defined in the primary study) Participant reports. Serious adverse events observed during double‐blind treatment period | no estimate extracted | 12 studies · 4289 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |