ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2024
Inclusion, reporting and analysis of demographic variables in chronobiology and sleep research.
Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- REM Sleep Correlates of Trait Anxiety in Non-Clinical Adults: The Role of Sex and Age.Journal of sleep research · 2026Article
- Pharmacological interventions for patients with chronic primary musculoskeletal pain: disparity between synthesized evidence and real-world clinical practice.Pain reports · 2025Article
- Evaluation of the Digital Ventilated Cage® system for circadian phenotyping.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Chronobiology in Paediatric Neurological and Neuropsychiatric Disorders: Harmonizing Care with Biological Clocks.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Primer on Reproducible Research in R: Enhancing Transparency and Scientific Rigor.Clocks & sleep · 2023Review
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
Abstract
Many aspects of sleep and circadian physiology are sensitive to participant-level characteristics. While recent research robustly highlights the importance of considering participant-level demographic information, the extent to which this information is consistently collected, and reported in the literature, remains unclear. This article investigates study sample characteristics within the published sleep and chronobiology research over the past 40 years. 6,777 articles were identified and a random sample of 20% was included. The reporting of sample size, age, sex, gender, ethnicity, level of education, socio-economic status, and profession of the study population was scored, and any reported aggregate summary statistics for these variables were recorded. We observed a significant upward trend in the reporting and analysis of demographic variables in sleep and chronobiology research. However, we found that while > 90% of studies reported age or sex, all other variables were reported in < 25% of cases. Reporting quality was highly variable, indicating an opportunity to standardize reporting guidelines for participant-level characteristics to facilitate Meta analyses.
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.