Skip to the main content

Sleep

Magnesium Glycinateand Sleep

All three sources here measured higher sleep.

How sure anyone can be

Very low certainty, level 1 of 4

Any estimate here is very uncertain.

The most certain of the three findings here; each record carries its own.

The numbers reported

0.2
Cohen's d for week-4 ISI improvement; ISI -3.9 vs -2.3 placebo, p=0.049
-17.36
minutes sleep-onset latency mean difference versus placebo
6.4
minutes slow-wave sleep increase versus placebo

None of these sources gave a likely range — the band the real answer probably sits in — so how precise these numbers are is still an open question here.

Three sources, newest first

What we read is the published abstract, not the full paper, so a blank below may still be printed in the paper itself. A person went through the criteria and recorded which brought the rating down. Their reasons are not on record here.

  • Randomised trial, 2025

    Very low certainty, level 1 of 4

    Magnesium Bisglycinate Supplementation in Healthy Adults Reporting Poor Sleep: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

    Schuster J, Cycelskij I, Lopresti A, Hahn A. Magnesium Bisglycinate Supplementation in Healthy Adults Reporting Poor Sleep: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Nat Sci Sleep. 2025;17:2027-2040. doi:10.2147/NSS.S524348. PMID:40918053.

    Number reported
    0.2
    Which way it went
    Higher
    Likely range
    Not in the abstract
    Source’s own words
    Cohen's d for week-4 ISI improvement; ISI -3.9 vs -2.3 placebo, p=0.049
    Who was studied
    Adult
    Compared with
    placebo
    Amount taken
    250 mg/d
    For how long
    Not in the abstract
    Disagreement between studies
    Not in the abstract
    Kind of record
    Randomised controlled trial
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 3 steps down: risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Risk of bias brought it down to ModerateThe reason for this step is not on record here.
    3. Indirectness brought it down to LowThe reason for this step is not on record here.
    4. Imprecision brought it down to Very lowThe reason for this step is not on record here.
    5. Ends at Very low3 steps down.
    Not written down for this rating
    inconsistency

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    Published before the signing gate; not yet re-verified.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

  • Systematic review, 2021

    Very low certainty, level 1 of 4

    Oral magnesium supplementation for insomnia in older adults: a Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis.

    Mah J, Pitre T. Oral magnesium supplementation for insomnia in older adults: a Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis. BMC Complement Med Ther. 2021;21(1):125. doi:10.1186/s12906-021-03297-z. PMID:33865376.

    This source later carried a notice: Erratum in BMC Complement Med Ther. 2024 Dec 19;24(1):418. doi: 10.1186/s12906-024-04721-w. The number below is exactly as the source gave it.

    Number reported
    -17.36
    Which way it went
    Higher
    Likely range
    Not in the abstract
    Source’s own words
    minutes sleep-onset latency mean difference versus placebo
    Who was studied
    Adult
    Compared with
    placebo or no treatment
    Amount taken
    225 to 1,000 mg/d
    For how long
    Not in the abstract
    Disagreement between studies
    Not in the abstract
    Kind of record
    Systematic review and meta-analysis
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 3 steps down: risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Risk of bias brought it down to ModerateThe reason for this step is not on record here.
    3. Indirectness brought it down to LowThe reason for this step is not on record here.
    4. Imprecision brought it down to Very lowThe reason for this step is not on record here.
    5. Ends at Very low3 steps down.
    Not written down for this rating
    inconsistency

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    Published before the signing gate; not yet re-verified.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

  • Randomised trial, 2002

    Very low certainty, level 1 of 4

    Oral Mg(2+) supplementation reverses age-related neuroendocrine and sleep EEG changes in humans.

    Held K, Antonijevic IA, Kunzel H, Uhr M, Wetter TC, Golly IC, et al. Oral Mg(2+) supplementation reverses age-related neuroendocrine and sleep EEG changes in humans. Pharmacopsychiatry. 2002;35(4):135-143. doi:10.1055/s-2002-33195. PMID:12163983.

    Number reported
    6.4
    Which way it went
    Higher
    Likely range
    Not in the abstract
    Source’s own words
    minutes slow-wave sleep increase versus placebo
    Who was studied
    Adult
    Compared with
    placebo cross over
    Amount taken
    243 to 729 mg/d
    For how long
    Not in the abstract
    Disagreement between studies
    Not in the abstract
    Kind of record
    Randomised controlled trial
    How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 3 steps down: risk of bias, indirectness and imprecision
    1. Starts at High
    2. Risk of bias brought it down to ModerateThe reason for this step is not on record here.
    3. Indirectness brought it down to LowThe reason for this step is not on record here.
    4. Imprecision brought it down to Very lowThe reason for this step is not on record here.
    5. Ends at Very low3 steps down.
    Not written down for this rating
    inconsistency

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    Published before the signing gate; not yet re-verified.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

What is still missing from these readings

  • Three give no likely range, so how precise those numbers are is unknown.
  • Three do not say how many people took part.
  • For how long — Not in the abstract.

Something nobody wrote down is never a zero and never a guess.

Magnesium Glycinate is not on our to-read list

Magnesium Glycinate is not on our to-read list, so nothing here is set out to read next for it.

Still to read means nobody here has got to it, not that it was tried and did nothing or that no research exists. A pairing on no list is not a gap: we never set out to read it.

Read next

This is a library, not advice. No recommendation, no dose, no diagnosis, no ranking. We never ask about your symptoms, and nothing here is tailored to you.