ArticleSleep medicine: X2026
Sleeping without borders: Gaps in contextualizing sleep duration guidelines for adults in low-income countries.
Article in Sleep medicine: X, 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.
- Sleep without borders starts here: Principles and pathways for sleep health promotion.Sleep medicine: X · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Empirical data on adult sleep health are scarce in many low-income countries, despite the significant health risks associated with inadequate sleep. To help address this gap in low-income countries, the World Sleep Society's Global Sleep Health Taskforce recommends applying evidence from high-income settings - such as guidance from the American Academy of Sleep Medicine/Sleep Research Society AASM/SRS) and the National Sleep Foundation (NSF) to inform the development of sleep health policies and programs. Objective: To evaluate the appropriateness of adapting existing consensus recommendations on healthy sleep duration for adults from the AASM/SRS and the NSF for use in low-income countries by applying World Health Organization (WHO) contextualization benchmarks. Methods: We reviewed AASM/SRS and NSF methods papers and assessed four WHO benchmarks: (1) consideration of low-income country priorities in question formulation and literature search; (2) inclusion of evidence from low-income countries; (3) involvement of stakeholders from low-income countries in consensus preparation; and (4) representation of low-income countries or relevant expertise in expert panels. Empirical studies cited in both statements were classified by country income level using World Bank 2025-2026 classifications. Chi-square tests compared distributions across income groups. Results: Neither the AASM/SRS or NSF consensus process incorporated priorities, evidence, or representation from low-income countries. Of the empirical studies reviewed, 96% originated from high-income countries, 4% from upper-middle-income countries, and none from lower-middle-income countries (LMIC). No stakeholders or experts from low-income countries participated in guideline development. Both statements showed significant overrepresentation of high-income contexts (p < .001). Conclusions: Current sleep duration recommendations lack contextualization for low-income settings and do not meet WHO standards in this regard. Future guideline development should broaden evidence sources, engage local stakeholders, and apply participatory frameworks to ensure cultural relevance, equity, and practical implementation.
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.