3. Results
LME, insomnia
CHRONIC INSOMNIA
Ninety subjects showed interest in participating in the study and received the eligibility questionnaire: 78 filled in the questionnaire but only 59 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were randomly allocated to the treated (The baseline (t0) characteristics of the participants for the two groups are shown separately in It is worth noting that at t0, 39 subjects (19 controls and 20 treated) had an SCI questionnaire score of <16, indicating an insomnia condition; all of them also reported a chronic insomnia condition (persisting for at least three months) as measured by the 8th item of the SCI questionnaire. After the intervention, 16 subjects (12 controls and only four treated) had an SCI questionnaire score of <16. As regards PSQI, at t0, the whole sample had a score of ≥5, indicating poor sleep quality, while at t1, three subjects in the control group and seven subjects in the treatment group had a score of <5, indicating that they no longer had a poor sleep quality. Moreover, before the intervention, a total of 13 subjects reported sleeping less than five hours a day (seven controls and six treated), while at t1, a total of eight subjects reported sleeping less than five hours a day (six controls and two treated), as measured by Component 3, i.e., sleep latency, of the PSQI.The mean number of IM classes attended by the 38 participants was 8.9 over a total of 12 classes with 78% of the participants attending at least seven classes. This indicates good participation by our subjects in the intervention proposed. Thus, IM class participation showed the applicability of our study to those who wanted to improve sleep quality. As for the dietary advice in the intervention group, 15 subjects reported a low adherence, eight a medium adherence, and five a high adherence to the dietary program.Data were analyzed following an intention-to-treat (ITT) approach and LME models were used to estimate the effectiveness of the intervention on the investigated outcomes. The results, as reported in A subsequent clinical significance analysis was performed on PSQI total score, PSQI Components 1, 4, 7, ISI and SCI by using the mean and standard deviation of the functional population derived by [Furthermore, as regards the dose–response effect of the number of attended IM sessions on the pre–post differences in the questionnaire scores, no statistically significant dose–response effect was observed (see 