外源性褪黑素与睡眠质量:系统综述的范围综述。

IF 2.3 4区 医学
Samyuktha Iyer, Vaneesha Monk, Rebeccah Slater, Luke Baxter
{"title":"外源性褪黑素与睡眠质量:系统综述的范围综述。","authors":"Samyuktha Iyer, Vaneesha Monk, Rebeccah Slater, Luke Baxter","doi":"10.1002/jcph.70115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Melatonin is increasingly used to treat sleep disturbances, yet its overall efficacy remains unclear due to variability in existing evidence. This scoping review aimed to synthesize systematic reviews with meta-analyses assessing the effects of exogenously administered melatonin on sleep quality in humans. Seven databases were searched from inception to July 9, 2025. Eligible studies were systematic reviews containing at least one meta-analysis evaluating melatonin's effects on any domain of sleep quality compared to any comparator. Fifty-seven systematic reviews were included, comprising 227 meta-analyses. Overlap in primary studies was low (corrected covered area = 2.5%), suggesting that reviews drew on largely distinct evidence bases. Methodological quality was variable: only 8.8% of reviews met all seven predefined criteria for rigor, including protocol pre-registration, dual screening, and bias assessments. Vote counting based on the direction of effect was used to summarize efficacy. Of the 215 meta-analyses comparing melatonin to an inactive comparator, 80.9% favored melatonin, 7.9% favored the comparator, and 11.2% reported unclear results. Sleep quality was assessed using heterogeneous definitions and tools, with few reviews evaluating overall sleep quality directly. Adverse events were commonly reported and generally mild, with headaches, gastrointestinal problems, and dizziness most frequently observed. However, inconsistent terminology and reporting limited synthesis. Despite heterogeneity in review methods and outcome definitions, the direction of evidence consistently favored melatonin over placebo. These findings support the feasibility of a future quantitative umbrella review to estimate pooled effects and guide clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":48908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exogenous Melatonin and Sleep Quality: A Scoping Review of Systematic Reviews.\",\"authors\":\"Samyuktha Iyer, Vaneesha Monk, Rebeccah Slater, Luke Baxter\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jcph.70115\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Melatonin is increasingly used to treat sleep disturbances, yet its overall efficacy remains unclear due to variability in existing evidence. This scoping review aimed to synthesize systematic reviews with meta-analyses assessing the effects of exogenously administered melatonin on sleep quality in humans. Seven databases were searched from inception to July 9, 2025. Eligible studies were systematic reviews containing at least one meta-analysis evaluating melatonin's effects on any domain of sleep quality compared to any comparator. Fifty-seven systematic reviews were included, comprising 227 meta-analyses. Overlap in primary studies was low (corrected covered area = 2.5%), suggesting that reviews drew on largely distinct evidence bases. Methodological quality was variable: only 8.8% of reviews met all seven predefined criteria for rigor, including protocol pre-registration, dual screening, and bias assessments. Vote counting based on the direction of effect was used to summarize efficacy. Of the 215 meta-analyses comparing melatonin to an inactive comparator, 80.9% favored melatonin, 7.9% favored the comparator, and 11.2% reported unclear results. Sleep quality was assessed using heterogeneous definitions and tools, with few reviews evaluating overall sleep quality directly. Adverse events were commonly reported and generally mild, with headaches, gastrointestinal problems, and dizziness most frequently observed. However, inconsistent terminology and reporting limited synthesis. Despite heterogeneity in review methods and outcome definitions, the direction of evidence consistently favored melatonin over placebo. These findings support the feasibility of a future quantitative umbrella review to estimate pooled effects and guide clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jcph.70115\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jcph.70115","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

褪黑素越来越多地用于治疗睡眠障碍,但由于现有证据的差异,其总体功效尚不清楚。本综述旨在综合系统综述和荟萃分析,评估外源性褪黑激素对人类睡眠质量的影响。从成立到2025年7月9日,对七个数据库进行了搜索。符合条件的研究是包含至少一项荟萃分析的系统综述,与任何比较物相比,评估褪黑素对睡眠质量任何领域的影响。纳入了57项系统综述,包括227项荟萃分析。初级研究的重叠率很低(校正后的覆盖面积= 2.5%),表明综述采用了很大程度上不同的证据基础。方法学质量是可变的:只有8.8%的综述符合所有七个预定义的严格标准,包括方案预注册、双重筛选和偏倚评估。采用基于效果方向的计票来总结效果。在215项将褪黑激素与无活性对照物进行比较的荟萃分析中,80.9%倾向于褪黑激素,7.9%倾向于对照物,11.2%报告的结果不明确。睡眠质量的评估使用了不同的定义和工具,很少有评论直接评估整体睡眠质量。不良事件经常被报道,但通常是轻微的,最常观察到的是头痛、胃肠道问题和头晕。然而,不一致的术语和报告限制了综合。尽管评价方法和结果定义存在异质性,但证据的方向始终支持褪黑激素优于安慰剂。这些发现支持未来定量总括评价的可行性,以估计综合效应并指导临床实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exogenous Melatonin and Sleep Quality: A Scoping Review of Systematic Reviews.

Melatonin is increasingly used to treat sleep disturbances, yet its overall efficacy remains unclear due to variability in existing evidence. This scoping review aimed to synthesize systematic reviews with meta-analyses assessing the effects of exogenously administered melatonin on sleep quality in humans. Seven databases were searched from inception to July 9, 2025. Eligible studies were systematic reviews containing at least one meta-analysis evaluating melatonin's effects on any domain of sleep quality compared to any comparator. Fifty-seven systematic reviews were included, comprising 227 meta-analyses. Overlap in primary studies was low (corrected covered area = 2.5%), suggesting that reviews drew on largely distinct evidence bases. Methodological quality was variable: only 8.8% of reviews met all seven predefined criteria for rigor, including protocol pre-registration, dual screening, and bias assessments. Vote counting based on the direction of effect was used to summarize efficacy. Of the 215 meta-analyses comparing melatonin to an inactive comparator, 80.9% favored melatonin, 7.9% favored the comparator, and 11.2% reported unclear results. Sleep quality was assessed using heterogeneous definitions and tools, with few reviews evaluating overall sleep quality directly. Adverse events were commonly reported and generally mild, with headaches, gastrointestinal problems, and dizziness most frequently observed. However, inconsistent terminology and reporting limited synthesis. Despite heterogeneity in review methods and outcome definitions, the direction of evidence consistently favored melatonin over placebo. These findings support the feasibility of a future quantitative umbrella review to estimate pooled effects and guide clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
Journal of Clinical Pharmacology PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
自引率
3.40%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology (JCP) is a Human Pharmacology journal designed to provide physicians, pharmacists, research scientists, regulatory scientists, drug developers and academic colleagues a forum to present research in all aspects of Clinical Pharmacology. This includes original research in pharmacokinetics, pharmacogenetics/pharmacogenomics, pharmacometrics, physiologic based pharmacokinetic modeling, drug interactions, therapeutic drug monitoring, regulatory sciences (including unique methods of data analysis), special population studies, drug development, pharmacovigilance, womens’ health, pediatric pharmacology, and pharmacodynamics. Additionally, JCP publishes review articles, commentaries and educational manuscripts. The Journal also serves as an instrument to disseminate Public Policy statements from the American College of Clinical Pharmacology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信