ArticleFrontiers in neurology2025
Reducing scheduled evening training does not improve recruits' sleep duration or quality during British Army basic training.
Article in Frontiers in neurology, 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.
- The prevalence and incidence of sleep disorder symptoms, correlates, and sex-stratified longitudinal associations with mental and menstrual health outcomes in UK Service Personnel: a prospective survey-based cohort study protocol.Sleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Sleep is critical to the health, wellbeing and performance of recruits during Army basic training, however, is often sacrificed due to the constraints of basic training schedules. In an effort to improve sleep duration of recruits, the revised Common Military Syllabus 21 (CMS21) restricted daily scheduled military training from 18:30, thus enabling greater opportunity for earlier bedtimes and longer nocturnal sleep periods. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of the revised CMS21 basic training programme on measures of sleep-wake indices and compare against the previous programme (CMS18) as a control group. Methods: Several actigraphy-derived and self-reported sleep-wake indices assessed potential changes in sleep opportunity between groups (CMS21 vs CMS18) and across 12-weeks of basic training. Actigraphy was measured daily to deduce weekly averages and self-report measures (i.e., sleep diaries) were captured during weeks 1, 6 and 11 of basic training. Sleep-wake data are presented descriptively (mean ± SD) and a series of linear-mixed models determined differences in actigraphy between groups and across each week. Results: Compared to CMS18, no significant improvements in any sleep-wake indices were observed during CMS21. The average sleep duration for both groups remained below the minimum national sleep duration recommendations for young adults (deficit of ~1 h 20 m), with 67% to 94% of recruits in CMS18 and 69% to 97% of recruits in CMS21 achieving an average of <7 h sleep per night, respectively. Similar proportions of recruits reported poor-levels of sleep quality (≤ 60%) during CMS18 and CMS21, with excessive noise and early-morning wake times identified as the most common sleep disturbances. The contracted early-morning feeding times and the magnitude of non-scheduled late-evening military admin were determined as key factors preventing adequate sleep opportunity despite restricting scheduled military training from 18:30 during CMS21. Discussion: The results of this study warrant the application of improved sleep hygiene practices within the basic training environment. It is also recommended that the contracted early-morning feeding times and magnitude of non-scheduled training activity be considered as factors for change within future programme design to optimize sleep opportunity during basic training.
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.