ReviewNeurobiology of sleep and circadian rhythms2022
Human circadian rhythm studies: Practical guidelines for inclusion/exclusion criteria and protocol.
Review in Neurobiology of sleep and circadian rhythms, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Caffeine Ingestion on Morning Cognitive and Muscle Strength Measures in Males: A Standardized Approach.Nutrients · 2026Trial
- Correlation between urinary 6-sulfatoxymelatonin and actigraphy data in a clinical population with sleep disorders: an observational study.Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung · 2026Observational
- Metastasis in biological time.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Methods for Assessment of Sleep and Circadian Rhythms in Cardiovascular Research.Current hypertension reports · 2025Review
- Within-subjects ultra-short sleep-wake protocol for characterising circadian variations in retinal function.PloS one · 2025Article
- Forecasting the course of bipolar disorder using rest-activity rhythms: Protocol for a multi-study modelling project.Wellcome open research · 2025Article
- Flight to insight: maximizing the potential ofFrontiers in molecular neuroscience · 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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
As interest in circadian rhythms and their effects continues to grow, there is an increasing need to perform circadian studies in humans. Although the constant routine is the gold standard for these studies, there are advantages to performing more naturalistic studies. Here, a review of protocols for such studies is provided along with sample inclusion and exclusion criteria. Sleep routines, drug use, shift work, and menstrual cycle are addressed as screening considerations. Regarding protocol, best practices for measuring melatonin, including light settings, posture, exercise, and dietary habits are described. The inclusion/exclusion recommendations and protocol guidelines are intended to reduce confounding variables in studies that do not involve the constant routine. Given practical limitations, a range of recommendations is provided from stringent to lenient. The scientific rationale behind these recommendations is discussed. However, where the science is equivocal, recommendations are based on empirical decisions made in previous studies. While not all of the recommendations listed may be practical in all research settings and with limited potential participants, the goal is to allow investigators to make well informed decisions about their screening procedures and protocol techniques and to improve rigor and reproducibility, in line with the objectives of the National Institutes of Health.
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.