ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Sleep in the age of technology: the use of sleep apps and perceived impact on sleep and sleep habits.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
Introduction: The rapid development in sleep related technology, particularly the emergence of sleep apps, has generated a need to uncover user characteristics and perceived effects. Methods: A sample of 1,002 adult participants living in Norway completed an online questionnaire on the use and perceived effects of sleep apps (response rate 19.8%). The questions pertained to demographics, including age, sex and educational level in addition to insomnia symptoms assessed with Bergen Insomnia Scale (BIS). The questionnaire also included 10 items focusing on perceived positive and negative effects of sleep app use. Composite scores for negative and positive effects were calculated (range 5-25, with higher scores indicating more negative and positive effects, respectively), and analyzed in relation to different characteristics (age, sex, education, insomnia) using t-tests and one-way ANOVAs. In addition, responses on each item were analyzed in relation to the different characteristics, using chi-square tests and logistic regression analyses. Results: A total of 46.0% of the participants reported current or previous use of sleep apps. Usage was more prevalent among women and younger individuals (<50 years) but was not associated with educational level or insomnia status. Mean composite score for positive effects was 14.57 ± 4.14, and the mean composite score for negative effects was 10.75 ± 3.85. Neither composite score was associated with sex, whereas both scores varied with age ( Conclusion: These findings suggest that sleep apps are commonly used in the Norwegian population, and most common among women and younger individuals (<50 years). Younger individuals appeared more responsive to sleep app feedback than older adults, both in terms of positive and negative effects, whereas individuals with lower education seemed more responsive to negative effects specifically. Of note, respondents with insomnia reported more negative effects of sleep app usage, suggesting that it may be wise to caution patients with sleep problems about such use.
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.