Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41099038›Full record

ArticleBMJ public health2025

Evidence-based public health messaging on the non-visual effects of ocular light exposure: a modified Delphi expert consensus.

Manuel Spitschan, Laura Kervezee, Oliver Stefani, Marijke Gordijn, Jennifer A Veitch, Renske Lok, Light for Public Health Consortium

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Physiologically-relevant light exposure and light behaviour in Switzerland and Malaysia.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2026
    Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Manuel SpitschanTechnical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8572-9268
Laura KervezeeLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.
Oliver StefaniLucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Lucerne, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0199-6500
Marijke GordijnUniversity of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Jennifer A VeitchNational Research Council Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Renske LokStanford University, Stanford, California, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1684-5625
Light for Public Health Consortium

Funding

Application of precision medicine to phototherapy: a stepped care approach to consolidate sleep and slow cognitive decline in older adultsK99AG084846 · NIA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI LOK, RENSKE · 2024 to 2025
$262k
NIA NIH HHS K99 AG084846
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In addition to vision, light regulates circadian rhythms, sleep, mood and alertness. Despite growing scientific understanding, there remains a gap in translating this knowledge into accessible, evidence-based guidance. The goal of this paper is to formulate scientifically grounded statements about the influence of light on human psychological and physiological health, intended for dissemination to the public and policymakers. Methods: An international consortium of 21 experts convened at the Ladenburg Roundtable in April 2024. Experts were selected based on their scientific contributions to chronobiology, psychology, neuroscience, and the measurement and practical application of light. Through a structured, iterative modified Delphi process, 27 statements were developed. Each statement included a simplified public-facing version and contextual information to support understanding. Consensus was assessed using predefined thresholds of agreement (>75% endorsement). Statements not meeting consensus were revised and re-evaluated. Results: Of the 27 proposed statements, 26 reached the threshold for consensus, with high levels of agreement across diverse topics. One statement did not reach consensus due to insufficient scientific evidence and was excluded, while another was revised based on feedback and subsequently accepted. The iterative revision process significantly improved the clarity, accuracy and accessibility of the final statements. A readability assessment showed an average sentence length of 14.8 words and a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level of 8.6, indicating that the statements suit a broad, non-specialist audience. The final consensus statements are available at lightforpublichealth.org. Conclusions: This expert consensus provides clear, accessible messages about how light affects human health. The statements offer a practical tool for public education and policymaking and can be used by public-health multipliers (eg, schools, employers, healthcare providers and urban planners) to promote healthier light exposure in daily life. They highlight the importance of recognising light as a key factor in health, alongside sleep, nutrition and physical activity.

Indexed as

CommunicationEnvironmental MedicineLight PollutionPublic Health

Identifiers

PMID41099038
PMCPMC12519682

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.