Advice on sleep habits improved sleep, but less than insomnia therapy did
No comparisonThe short version
In studies, people rated their sleep better after sleep habit advice, with no other group to compare.

- 1,194
- adults with insomnia or poor sleep
- Self-rated
- people rated themselves
- 2 tools
- tested
The review
Who took part
15 studies with 1,194 people who had poor sleep or insomnia. Average age was about 66, and about half were women.
What they did
The advice covered sleep habits, such as caffeine and regular sleep times. It came in one to six sessions, in a group, one to one, or as a printed sheet. It was compared with therapy for insomnia in 12 studies, and with mindfulness in three.
What happened
Sleep improved from the start to the end of the advice, but there was no other group to compare with. Compared with therapy, the advice helped less on questionnaires and in sleep diaries. Movement sensors that track sleep showed no clear difference between them.
What the review found
- No comparison
In studies, people rated their sleep better after sleep habit advice, with no other group to compare.
Pooled analysis of 0 studies · no comparison group · they rated themselves · ⚠ whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited
- Helped
In studies that tried both, insomnia therapy helped people rate their sleep better than advice did.
Pooled analysis of 0 studies · vs people who got sleep habit advice only · they rated themselves · ⚠ whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited
- No difference
In studies that compared them, movement sensors found no clear difference between the two groups.
Pooled analysis of 0 studies · vs people who got sleep habit advice only · behaviour was recorded · ⚠ whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited
How solid is this?
- Large group
- People rated themselves
- Whole programmes were tested, so no single part can be credited
Source
Sleep hygiene education as a treatment of insomnia: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2017)
DOI: 10.1093/fampra/cmx122 (opens in a new tab)

