ArticleJournal of intellectual disability research : JIDR2026
Reliability of Actigraphy for the Assessment of Sleep and Circadian Rhythms in Rett and Related Syndromes.
Article in Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 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.
- Reliability of Actigraphy for the Assessment of Sleep and Circadian Rhythms in Rett and Related Syndromes.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeActigraphy is being increasingly used to assess sleep and circadian rhythms among populations with intellectual and developmental disabilities and genetic syndromes, including Rett syndrome and related disorders, but the reliability of these measures in these populations is unclear. The primary purpose of the current study was to evaluate the impact of recording duration on the reliability of various measures of sleep and circadian rhythm in Rett and related syndromes.
methodTwo 14-day recordings were collected between 4 and 12 weeks apart in a sample of 30 individuals (aged 2-36 years; 97% female). Reliability was estimated by calculating statistics based on 3, 5, 7, 10 or 13-14 nights of recording.
resultsMost measures of average sleep quality could be reliably estimated with 7-10 nights. Measures of night-to-night variability in sleep timing showed poor reliability at all recording durations, whereas night-to-night variability in sleep duration showed adequate reliability at 5-7 days of recording. The reliability of measures of circadian rhythm was highly variable.
conclusionsThe results suggest that the optimal recording durations for actigraphy in this population vary based on the specific metrics of interest, but most can be measured reliably.
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.