Does reading a book in bed make a difference to sleep in comparison to not reading a book in bed? The People's Trial-an online, pragmatic, randomised trial.
Methodology
Online
Public engagement
Randomised trial
Research co-production
Sleep
We wrote this report using a plain language format. We did this in response to how people told us they wanted the results of The Reading Trial to be shared (phase vii of The People’s Trial).
Journal
Trials
ISSN: 1745-6215
Titre abrégé: Trials
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101263253
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 Dec 2021
04 Dec 2021
Historique:
received:
26
04
2021
accepted:
15
11
2021
entrez:
8
1
2022
pubmed:
9
1
2022
medline:
12
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The best way of comparing healthcare treatments is through a randomised trial. In a randomised trial, we compare something (a treatment or intervention) to something else, often another treatment. Who gets what is decided at random, meaning everyone has an equal chance of getting any of the treatments. This means any differences found can be put down to the treatment received rather than other things, such as where people live, or health conditions they might have. The People's Trial aimed to help the public better understand randomised trials by inviting them to design and carry out a trial. The question chosen by the public for The People's Trial was: 'Does reading a book in bed make a difference to sleep, in comparison to not reading a book in bed?' This paper describes that trial, called 'The Reading Trial'. The Reading Trial was an online, randomised trial. Members of the public were invited to take part through social media campaigns. People were asked to either read a book in bed before going to sleep (intervention group) or not read a book in bed before going to sleep (control group). We asked everyone to do this for 7 days, after which they measured their sleep quality. During December 2019, a total of 991 people took part in The Reading Trial, half (496 (50%)) in the intervention group and half (495 (50%)) in the control group. Not everyone finished the trial: 127 (25.6%) people in the intervention group and 90 (18.18%) people in the control group. Of those providing data, 156/369 (42%) people in the intervention group felt their sleep improved, compared to 112/405 (28%) of those in the control group, a difference of 14%. When we consider how certain we are of this finding, we estimate that, in The Reading Trial, sleep improved for between 8 and 22% more people in the intervention group compared to the control group. Reading a book in bed before going to sleep improved sleep quality, compared to not reading a book in bed. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04185818. Registered on 4 December 2019.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The best way of comparing healthcare treatments is through a randomised trial. In a randomised trial, we compare something (a treatment or intervention) to something else, often another treatment. Who gets what is decided at random, meaning everyone has an equal chance of getting any of the treatments. This means any differences found can be put down to the treatment received rather than other things, such as where people live, or health conditions they might have. The People's Trial aimed to help the public better understand randomised trials by inviting them to design and carry out a trial. The question chosen by the public for The People's Trial was: 'Does reading a book in bed make a difference to sleep, in comparison to not reading a book in bed?' This paper describes that trial, called 'The Reading Trial'.
METHODS
METHODS
The Reading Trial was an online, randomised trial. Members of the public were invited to take part through social media campaigns. People were asked to either read a book in bed before going to sleep (intervention group) or not read a book in bed before going to sleep (control group). We asked everyone to do this for 7 days, after which they measured their sleep quality.
RESULTS
RESULTS
During December 2019, a total of 991 people took part in The Reading Trial, half (496 (50%)) in the intervention group and half (495 (50%)) in the control group. Not everyone finished the trial: 127 (25.6%) people in the intervention group and 90 (18.18%) people in the control group. Of those providing data, 156/369 (42%) people in the intervention group felt their sleep improved, compared to 112/405 (28%) of those in the control group, a difference of 14%. When we consider how certain we are of this finding, we estimate that, in The Reading Trial, sleep improved for between 8 and 22% more people in the intervention group compared to the control group.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Reading a book in bed before going to sleep improved sleep quality, compared to not reading a book in bed.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04185818. Registered on 4 December 2019.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34996514
doi: 10.1186/s13063-021-05831-3
pii: 10.1186/s13063-021-05831-3
pmc: PMC8740874
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04185818']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
873Subventions
Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : HSRU1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Health Research Board
ID : KEDS-2018-012
Pays : Ireland
Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
J Eval Clin Pract. 2018 Feb;24(1):240-253
pubmed: 29076631
J Clin Sleep Med. 2019 May 15;15(5):757-767
pubmed: 31053215
Res Involv Engagem. 2018 May 14;4:15
pubmed: 29785283
Contemp Clin Trials. 2013 Jul;35(2):13-32
pubmed: 23557729
Healthcare (Basel). 2018 Dec 20;7(1):
pubmed: 30577441
J Clin Psychiatry. 2009 Aug;70(8):1098-104
pubmed: 19758521
Trials. 2020 Apr 25;21(1):360
pubmed: 32334620
Trials. 2019 Oct 28;20(1):613
pubmed: 31661029
Clin Trials. 2015 Feb;12(1):77-83
pubmed: 25475878
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018 Aug 1;110(8):880-887
pubmed: 29471478
Lancet. 2014 Jan 11;383(9912):101-4
pubmed: 24411643
Trials. 2020 Mar 12;21(1):259
pubmed: 32164790
Sleep Med. 2017 Feb;30:229-239
pubmed: 28215254
Geriatr Nurs. 2018 Sep - Oct;39(5):506-512
pubmed: 29530293
BMJ Open. 2017 Mar 20;7(3):e015276
pubmed: 28320800
Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2015 Dec 17;2:6-11
pubmed: 29736441
Curr Med Res Opin. 2008 Jan;24(1):307-17
pubmed: 18070379
J Hum Hypertens. 2017 Jun;31(6):371-372
pubmed: 28465616
J Am Assoc Nurse Pract. 2013 May;25(5):272-9
pubmed: 24170569
J Clin Sleep Med. 2015 Aug 15;11(8):931-52
pubmed: 26235159
PLoS One. 2019 Oct 8;14(10):e0223526
pubmed: 31593576
Arch Dis Child. 2004 Aug;89(8):708-12
pubmed: 15269066
J Clin Sleep Med. 2018 Nov 15;14(11):1849-1857
pubmed: 30373688
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;(4):CD003404
pubmed: 12519595
Cancer. 2008 Jan 15;112(2):228-42
pubmed: 18008363
Perspect Clin Res. 2016 Jul-Sep;7(3):137-43
pubmed: 27453831
Sleep. 2015 May 01;38(5):829-32
pubmed: 25669182
Med Care. 2007 May;45(5 Suppl 1):S3-S11
pubmed: 17443116
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Mar 25;14:42
pubmed: 24669751
Int J Behav Healthc Res. 2011 Oct;2(4):320-332
pubmed: 25383095
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Feb 22;2:MR000013
pubmed: 29468635