ReviewJournal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine2024
A shot in the dark: the impact of online visibility on the search for an effective sleep app.
Review in Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Management of adult insomnia in Australia: a joint position statement of the Australasian Sleep Association, Sleep Health Foundation, Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, Australian Psychological Society, Pharmaceutical Society of Australia, and Australian Primary Health Care Nurses Association.Sleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectivesDictated by consumer ratings and concealed algorithms, high levels of online visibility are granted to certain sleep apps on mainstream modes of app selection. Yet, it remains unclear to what extent these highly visible apps are evidence-based. The objectives of this review were to identify and describe the apps with the greatest online visibility when searching for a sleep app and to assess the claimed and actual research associated with them.
methodsA keyword search was conducted in Google Play and Google search. Titles of the most visible apps were retrieved. App descriptions were examined to identify research claims made about app effectiveness on sleep and other health-related outcomes. A follow-up search on PubMed and Google Scholar was conducted to verify claims.
resultsThe keyword search identified 53 highly visible apps. Examination of app store descriptions found that no reference to research was made for the majority of apps (n = 45, 84.9%). Published research studies were available for just 3 apps, with most studies evaluating app impact on non sleep-related outcomes. There was some evidence to attesting to the effectiveness of 2 apps in improving sleep.
conclusionsThis review demonstrates how, when carrying out a typical search for a sleep app, information about the evidence base for the majority of highly visible apps is not available. Results highlight the need for the improvement of mainstream modes of app selection in terms of better consumer-app specificity and increased transparency regarding the access to information about the evidence base for apps. CITATION: Power N, Boivin DB, Perreault M. A shot in the dark: the impact of online visibility on the search for an effective sleep app.
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.