ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2026
Misperception of supine sleep in the sleep laboratory: a retrospective review of self-reported versus polysomnography-measured sleep position.
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
purposeAccuracy of patient-perceived sleeping position has implications for the acquisition and interpretation of sleep studies, implementation of positive airway pressure (PAP) therapies, and determining efficacy of positional therapies at home. This study aimed to compare self-reported supine sleep to observed supine sleep on polysomnography (PSG) and identify patient-related factors that contribute to supine sleep misperception.
methodsA retrospective review of clinical PSG records from a public sleep service was performed. Body position was measured with a Grael position sensor with manual editing based on digital video if discrepant. Each patient completed a sleep questionnaire including questions regarding sleep position on the PSG. Self-reported supine sleep was divided into categories of "None/Some/Half/Most/All", with PSG-measured supine sleep as a percentage of total sleep time (%TST) classified into these categories based on the cut-points of 0, 2.5, 33.3, 66.6, 97.5 and 100%. Absence of supine sleep on PSG was defined by the cut-point of "None" (≤ 2.5%TST). Chance-adjusted agreement between objective and subjective measures was assessed using the Cohen's kappa statistic (linear weighting).
resultsA total of 956 patient records were available for analysis. 93% of patients who self-reported supine sleep on the PSG were correct, whereas only 56% of those who denied supine sleep accurately reported the absence of supine sleep on PSG. Patients who reported not sleeping on their back during the PSG had 11.0 ((95% CI: 7.0, 17.3), p < .001) times the odds of sleep position misperception than those who did report sleeping on their back. Agreement with self-reported categories of "None/Some/Half/Most/All was only moderate (kappa 0.45 [95% CI 0.43, 0.48]). Younger patients (< 55 years) and females were more likely to under-report supine sleep.
conclusionsPatients denying supine sleep in the laboratory were more likely to misperceive sleep position on PSG, with younger females under-reporting supine sleep. Understanding contributors to misperception may influence decisions regarding supine sleep sampling in the laboratory, as well clinical decision making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41606288What 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.