ArticleJournal of biological rhythms2020
Estimating Representative Group Intrinsic Circadian Period from Illuminance-Response Curve Data.
Article in Journal of biological rhythms, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modeling the Effects of Napping and Non-napping Patterns of Light Exposure on the Human Circadian Oscillator.Journal of biological rhythms · 2023Article
- Integrating wearable data into circadian models.Current opinion in systems biology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The human circadian pacemaker entrains to the 24-h day, but interindividual differences in properties of the pacemaker, such as intrinsic period, affect chronotype and mediate responses to challenges to the circadian system, such as shift work and jet lag, and the efficacy of therapeutic interventions such as light therapy. Robust characterization of circadian properties requires desynchronization of the circadian system from the rest-activity cycle, and these forced desynchrony protocols are very time and resource intensive. However, circadian protocols designed to derive the relationship between light intensity and phase shift, which is inherently affected by intrinsic period, may be applied more broadly. To exploit this relationship, we applied a mathematical model of the human circadian pacemaker with a Markov-Chain Monte Carlo parameter estimation algorithm to estimate the representative group intrinsic period for a group of participants using their collective illuminance-response curve data. We first validated this methodology using simulated illuminance-response curve data in which the intrinsic period was known. Over a physiological range of intrinsic periods, this method accurately estimated the representative intrinsic period of the group. We also applied the method to previously published experimental data describing the illuminance-response curve for a group of healthy adult participants. We estimated the study participants' representative group intrinsic period to be 24.26 and 24.27 h using uniform and normal priors, respectively, consistent with estimates of the average intrinsic period of healthy adults determined using forced desynchrony protocols. Our results establish an approach to estimate a population's representative intrinsic period from illuminance-response curve data, thereby facilitating the characterization of intrinsic period across a broader range of participant populations than could be studied using forced desynchrony protocols. Future applications of this approach may improve the understanding of demographic differences in the intrinsic circadian period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.