ArticleJournal of sleep research2025
Exploring person-centred sleep and rest-activity cycle dynamics over 6 months.
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 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.
- Exploring person-centred sleep and rest-activity cycle dynamics over 6 months.Journal of sleep research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sleep and circadian characteristics are associated with health outcomes, but are often examined cross-sectionally or using variable-centred analyses. Person-centred longitudinal research is needed to identify combined effects of sleep and circadian characteristics while allowing for change over time. We aimed to classify individuals into sleep-circadian statuses (aim 1), determine whether they transitioned between statuses over time (aim 2), and explore associated covariates and health outcomes (aim 3). Young adults (N = 151) wore smartwatches continuously for 6 months. Sleep (total sleep time, wake after sleep onset) and circadian rest-activity cycle indicators (interdaily stability, intradaily variability, relative amplitude) were derived from acceleration data and aggregated into person-means for months 1, 3, and 6. These values were entered into a latent transition model for aims 1 and 2. Multinomial logistic regressions, ANOVA, and ANCOVA addressed aim 3. Four statuses were extracted (entropy = 0.88): optimal sleepers, restless sleepers, short sleepers, and nappers. 10%-13% of optimal sleepers and 21% of restless sleepers became nappers, 7%-18% of nappers transitioned to other statuses, and 94%-100% of short sleepers remained unchanged. Males were more likely than females to be short versus optimal sleepers (p < 0.001). Restless sleepers had more physical dysfunction than nappers and short sleepers (p = 0.014, 0.022), while short sleepers reported more excessive sleepiness than optimal sleepers and nappers (p = 0.006, 0.060). This study identified four sleep-circadian statuses and found evidence for change over time. Our longitudinal person-centred approach could help inform the development of tailored diagnostic guidelines for sleep and circadian-related disorders that fluctuate within-individuals.
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.