ReviewCureus2026
Effectiveness of Adaptive Digital Interventions Triggered by Passive Sensing for Sleep Improvement in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adaptive digital interventions that respond to real-time physiological data from passive sensors are emerging as personalized tools for sleep improvement. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions in improving sleep outcomes and overall health indicators in adults. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ScienceDirect for studies published from January 2015 to July 2025. The included studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving adults (≥18 years), with or without diagnosed sleep disorders, evaluating adaptive digital interventions triggered by passive sensing technologies (actigraphy, wearables, smartphones), compared to static digital tools, usual care, or waitlist controls. The outcomes had to include at least one sleep-related or secondary health metric. Two reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool. Meta-analyses were conducted using random effects models. Effect sizes were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I² statistic. Twelve RCTs (n = 798 participants) were included. Adaptive interventions significantly improved wakefulness after sleep onset (WASO, SMD = 3.22; 95% CI: 3.02-3.41), with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 70.7%). The effects on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) score, sleep efficiency, and latency were small and not significant. However, the secondary outcomes, including improvements in quality of life (SMD = 1.36), depressive symptoms (SMD = 0.53), sleep duration (SMD = 0.41), and neuropsychiatric inventory scores (SMD = -1.21), were favorable. Subgroup analyses revealed greater benefits in populations with cognitive impairments and interventions using advanced sensing tools (MotionWatch8). Adaptive digital interventions triggered by passive sensing show promise for reducing night-time awakenings and enhancing mood and quality of life. Their utility may be greatest in cognitively vulnerable populations. Further research is needed to optimize adaptivity algorithms, ensure sustained engagement, and assess long-term outcomes in real-world settings.
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.