ArticleSleep2024
Can we rely on wearable sleep-tracker devices for fatigue management?
Article in Sleep, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neighborhood disadvantage and adolescent sleep health: a longitudinal population-based study.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2026Article
- Sleep-inducing algorithms: can artificial intelligence help shiftworkers and those working nonstandard hours sleep better?Sleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society · 2026Article
- Article
- A narrative review on in-flight use of consumer sleep technologies for aviation research.Sleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society · 2025Review
- Race, Ethnicity, and Sleep in US Children.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Navigating the night: evaluating and accessing wearable sleep trackers for clinical use.Sleep · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesWearable sleep-tracker devices are ubiquitously used to measure sleep; however, the estimated sleep parameters often differ from the gold-standard polysomnography (PSG). It is unclear to what extent we can tolerate these errors within the context of a particular clinical or operational application. Here, we sought to develop a method to quantitatively determine whether a sleep tracker yields acceptable sleep-parameter estimates for assessing alertness impairment.
methodsUsing literature data, we characterized sleep-measurement errors of 18 unique sleep-tracker devices with respect to PSG. Then, using predictions based on the unified model of performance, we compared the temporal variation of alertness in terms of the psychomotor vigilance test mean response time for simulations with and without added PSG-device sleep-measurement errors, for nominal schedules of 5, 8, or 9 hours of sleep/night or an irregular sleep schedule each night for 30 consecutive days. Finally, we deemed a device error acceptable when the predicted differences were smaller than the within-subject variability of 30 milliseconds. We also established the capability to estimate the extent to which a specific sleep-tracker device meets this acceptance criterion.
resultsOn average, the 18 sleep-tracker devices overestimated sleep duration by 19 (standard deviation = 44) minutes. Using these errors for 30 consecutive days, we found that, regardless of sleep schedule, in nearly 80% of the time the resulting predicted alertness differences were smaller than 30 milliseconds.
conclusionsWe provide a method to quantitatively determine whether a sleep-tracker device produces sleep measurements that are operationally acceptable for fatigue management.
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.