ArticleJournal of biological rhythms2022
A Data-Informed Perspective on Public Preferences for Retaining or Abolishing Biannual Clock Changes.
Article in Journal of biological rhythms, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of epidemiological studies into daylight-saving time & health identifying beneficial & adverse effects.European journal of epidemiology · 2026Pooled it
- Health-Framed Messaging and Its Impact on Attitudes Toward Daylight Saving Time.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Assessing the best hour to start the day: an appraisal of seasonal daylight saving time.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Days to re-entrainment following the spring and autumn changes in local clock time: Beyond simple heuristics.Frontiers in photonics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scientific, public, and political discourse around the perennial changing of the clocks during the transitions into and out of daylight saving time (DST) is a touchstone issue for the translation of fundamental chronobiology into societal impacts. The Society for Research on Biological Rhythms, along with other sleep science bodies, has issued a position statement that advocates for the abolition of the biannual clock changes and the adoption of permanent standard time for the optimization of population circadian health. However, there is a paucity of data on preexisting public perceptions and preferences with regard to these issues. In this perspective, we examine 5 issues that we believe are pertinent for chronobiologists to consider to enable effective advocacy on these policies; in particular, we discuss public preference for permanent DST and steps that may need to be taken to understand this preference. We inform our discussion with reference to cross-sectional studies we undertook in Spring 2020 and Fall 2019, around the transition out of and into DST Ireland. We conclude that there appears to be a gap between existing public perceptions and preferences around the clock changes and chronobiological and sleep science-informed positions, and that the chronobiology community may benefit from interdisciplinary collaboration with colleagues with specific social sciences expertise to most effectively advocate for these research-informed positions.
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.