ArticlePM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation2026
How is wakeful rest operationalized and measured in daily life among adults with and without long-term conditions? A systematic scoping review.
Article in PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation, 2026. 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.
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
A systematic scoping review was conducted to examine how rest is operationalized and measured in daily life among adults with and without long-term conditions. Searches were performed in PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Psych databases for studies from 1990 to 2024. Two independent reviewers screened and selected eligible studies, which included adults with and without long-term conditions. A content analysis was used to synthesize qualitative and quantitative evidence, categorizing rest-related descriptions. Additionally, descriptive and narrative synthesis methods were employed. Of 9393 initial records, 17 studies were included in the review. The findings revealed that rest was operationalized by several key elements, including cessation of activity or engagement in low-energy tasks (n = 9 studies); detachment from activities (n = 4 studies); experiences of peace, joy, and tranquility (n = 5 studies); and time for self-reflection and solitude (n = 2 studies). The operationalization of rest showed both similarities and differences between adults with and without long-term conditions. Although all groups defined rest in physical, emotional, and social terms, mental rest was more prominently emphasized by adults without long-term conditions. The review also identified the effects of rest, including improvements in well-being and psychological functioning (n = 4 studies) and enhanced energy levels that facilitated daily activities (n = 4 studies). However, "excessive" rest was linked to negative outcomes, such as increased physical symptoms and disability (n = 3 studies). Notably, only two studies assessed rest measurement tools for adults with long-term conditions. The findings suggest that rest can enhance energy, well-being, and functioning, but excessive rest may worsen physical symptoms and disability. Tailored guidance on optimal rest is essential for maximizing health benefits. The review also highlights the need for further research on comprehensive tools to measure rest.
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.