Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40232641›Full record

Trial reportSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2025

Moderately strong intraclass correlations between actigraphic and polysomnographic total sleep time and sleep efficiency in older adults with sleep disturbance.

Matthew M Rahimi, Craig L Phillips, Nathaniel S Marshall, Rick Wassing, Teha Pun, Ron R Grunstein, Christopher J Gordon

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. 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.

Matthew M RahimiCIRUS Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology, Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Matthew.Rahimi@mq.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-7799-9348
Craig L PhillipsCIRUS Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology, Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Nathaniel S MarshallCIRUS Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology, Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Rick WassingCIRUS Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology, Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Teha PunMacquarie Medical School, Faculty of Medicine, Health and Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Ron R GrunsteinCIRUS Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology, Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Christopher J GordonCIRUS Centre for Sleep and Chronobiology, Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the reliability of the GeneActiv actigraphy device in measuring sleep parameters and compare its performance with polysomnography (PSG) in older adults with self-reported sleep disturbances.

methodsThis sub-study was part of a pilot double-blinded randomized controlled crossover trial (CleverLights Study, ANZCTR ID 12619000138189). Participants (n = 12, mean age 67.7 years) underwent two nights of sleep studies with simultaneous GeneActiv actigraphy and PSG, separated by a 2-week interval. Sleep parameters including time in bed (TIB), total sleep time (TST), wake after sleep onset (WASO), sleep onset latency (SOL), sleep efficiency (SE), and number of awakenings were assessed. Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) and Bland-Altman plots were used to determine reliability and agreement between methods.

resultsGeneActiv actigraphy demonstrated strong correlations with PSG for TST (ICC = 0.79, p = 0.001) and SE (ICC = 0.85, p < 0.001), but tended to overestimate these parameters. Actigraphy also significantly underestimated the number of awakenings (ICC = 0.45, p = 0.021). Correlations with observed TIB (ICC = 0.30, p = 0.433), WASO (ICC = 0.33, p = 0.386), and SOL (ICC = 0.32, p = 0.056) were non-significant. Bland-Altman plots revealed proportional bias, especially in SOL and the number of awakenings.

conclusionCompared to PSG, the GeneActiv actigraphy device provides reliable measurements for total sleep time and sleep efficiency, but agreement was weaker for wake after sleep onset, sleep onset latency, and the number of awakenings. The device showed consistent performance across multiple nights, suggesting good reproducibility. However, it systematically overestimated total sleep time and underestimates wake-related parameters, hence it may not fully replace PSG for detailed sleep assessments.

Indexed as

ActigraphyPolysomnographySleep Wake DisordersAgedCross-Over StudiesDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsReproducibility of ResultsSleep DurationActigraphyGeneActivOlder peoplePolysomnographyRepeated measuresSleep

Identifiers

PMID40232641
PMCPMC12000170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.