Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37632717›Full record

ArticleJournal of sleep research2025

Pilot feasibility testing of biomathematical model recommendations for personalising sleep timing in shift workers.

Prerna Varma, Svetlana Postnova, Andrew J K Phillips, Stuart Knock, Mark E Howard, Shantha M W Rajaratnam, Tracey L Sletten

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of sleep research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Prerna VarmaTurner Institute for Brain and Mental Health and School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5408-1625
Svetlana PostnovaSchool of Physics, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.
Andrew J K PhillipsTurner Institute for Brain and Mental Health and School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
Stuart KnockSchool of Physics, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, Australia.
Mark E HowardTurner Institute for Brain and Mental Health and School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
Shantha M W RajaratnamTurner Institute for Brain and Mental Health and School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
Tracey L SlettenTurner Institute for Brain and Mental Health and School of Psychological Sciences, Monash University, Clayton, Australia.
Monash University · AUThe University of Sydney · AUBrigham and Women's Hospital · USThe University of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sleep disturbances and circadian disruption play a central role in adverse health, safety, and performance outcomes in shift workers. While biomathematical models of sleep and alertness can be used to personalise interventions for shift workers, their practical implementation is undertested. This study tested the feasibility of implementing two biomathematical models-the Phillips-Robinson Model and the Model for Arousal Dynamics-in 28 shift-working nurses, 14 in each group. The study examined the overlap and adherence between model recommendations and sleep behaviours, and changes in sleep following the implementation of recommendations. For both groups combined, the mean (SD) percentage overlap between when a model recommended an individual to sleep and when sleep was obtained was 73.62% (10.24%). Adherence between model recommendations and sleep onset and offset times was significantly higher with the Model of Arousal Dynamics compared to the Phillips-Robinson Model. For the Phillips-Robinson model, 27% of sleep onset and 35% of sleep offset times were within ± 30 min of model recommendations. For the Model of Arousal Dynamics, 49% of sleep onset, and 35% of sleep offset times were within ± 30 min of model recommendations. Compared to pre-study, significant improvements were observed post-study for sleep disturbance (Phillips-Robinson Model), and insomnia severity and sleep-related impairments (Model of Arousal Dynamics). Participants reported that using a digital, automated format for the delivery of sleep recommendations would enable greater uptake. These findings provide a positive proof-of-concept for using biomathematical models to recommend sleep in operational contexts.

Indexed as

Mathematical ConceptsModels, BiologicalSleepSleep Disorders, Circadian RhythmWork Schedule ToleranceAdultArousalDiaries as TopicFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNursesPatient CompliancePatient Reported Outcome Measuresalertnesscircadian rhythmshealthcareshift‐work disordersleep disorder

Identifiers

PMID37632717
PMCPMC12215231
OpenAlexW4386189484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.