ArticleJournal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine2022
Validation of a nonwearable device in healthy adults with normal and short sleep durations.
Article in Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring the Relationship Between General Motor Activity and Optimal Actigraphy Sleep Configurations: A Systematic Review.Journal of sleep research · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluation of the Accuracy of Contactless Consumer Sleep-Tracking Devices Application in Human Experiment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Pooled it
- YASA automated sleep staging performance across seven nights of normal sleep and sleep restriction.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a Contactless Sleep Monitoring Device for Sleep Stage Detection at Home in a Healthy Population: Prospective Study in Free-Living Conditions.JMIR human factors · 2026Article
- Implementing AI-Driven Bed Sensors: Perspectives from Interdisciplinary Teams in Geriatric Care.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Pyjamas, Polysomnography and Professional Athletes: The Role of Sleep Tracking Technology in Sport.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Actigraphy-Based Sleep Detection: Validation with Polysomnography and Comparison of Performance for Nighttime and Daytime Sleep During Simulated Shift Work.Nature and science of sleep · 2022Article
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 at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesTo determine the accuracy of early and newer versions of a nonwearable sleep tracking device relative to polysomnography and actigraphy, under conditions of normal and restricted sleep duration.
methodsParticipants were 35 healthy adults (mean age = 18.97; standard deviation = 0.95 years; 77.14% female; 42.86% White). In a controlled sleep laboratory environment, we randomly assigned participants to go to bed at 10:30 pm (normal sleep) or 1:30 am (restricted sleep), setting lights-on at 7:00 am. Sleep was measured using polysomnography, wristband actigraphy (the Philips Respironics Actiwatch Spectrum Plus), self-report, and an early or newer version of a nonwearable device that uses a sensor strip to measure movement, heart rate, and breathing (the Apple, Inc. Beddit). We tested accuracy against polysomnography for total sleep time, sleep efficiency, sleep onset latency, and wake after sleep onset.
resultsThe early version of the nonwearable device (Beddit 3.0) displayed poor reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] < 0.30). However, the newer nonwearable device (Beddit 3.5) yielded excellent reliability with polysomnography for total sleep time (ICC = 0.998) and sleep efficiency (ICC = 0.98) across normal and restricted sleep conditions. Agreement was also excellent for the notoriously difficult metrics of sleep onset latency (ICC = 0.92) and wake after sleep onset (ICC = 0.92). This nonwearable device significantly outperformed clinical-grade actigraphy (ICC between 0.44 and 0.96) and self-reported sleep measures (ICC < 0.75).
conclusionsA nonwearable device showed better agreement than actigraphy with polysomnography outcome measures. Future work is needed to test the validity of this device in clinical populations. CITATION: Hsiou DA, Gao C, Matlock RC, Scullin MK. Validation of a nonwearable device in healthy adults with normal and short sleep durations.
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.