Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42200968›Full record

ArticleClocks & sleep2026

From Sunlight to Screens: Modeling When Light Exposure Matters Most for Sleep and Circadian Health.

Franco Tavella, Michael Gradisar, Renske Lok, Olivia Walch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clocks & sleep, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Franco TavellaArcascope Inc., 4075 Wilson Blvd, Floor 8, Arlington, VA 22203, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5997-6241
Michael GradisarSleep Cycle AB, Sleep Science Team, 41250 Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID 0009-0003-0211-5223
Renske LokDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Olivia WalchArcascope Inc., 4075 Wilson Blvd, Floor 8, Arlington, VA 22203, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7881-6910

Funding

National Institute on Aging (NIA) through the NIH Pathway to Independence Award K99AG08484
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the effects of light on the body at different times of the 24 h solar day is a topic of increasing interest. In this paper, we use a mathematical model from the literature to simulate what would be expected of the human circadian clock on different light schedules. We first reproduce an influential experiment which found eBooks, when compared to a paper book, delayed sleep by roughly 10 min and melatonin onset by 1.5 h. The model is able to match the delay in sleep onset but struggles to reproduce the melatonin phase delay. However, certain initial conditions and parameters are capable of phase shifts consistent with the original study's magnitude, suggesting that the original study's finding may have been influenced by the pre-study entrainment or variability among the participants. We next simulate the same protocol under higher daytime light levels (increasing baseline illumination from 90 to 500 lux) and find that brighter daytime exposure reduces both sleep onset latency and the variability in phase delay attributable to evening eBook light. Finally, we explore how the timing of a bright light pulse during the day changes outcomes, such as sleep onset and circadian amplitude, and how these effects interact with light during the other hours of the 24 h day. Together, these modeling results suggest robust daytime light exposure confers resilience against the circadian-disruptive effects of evening light, generating testable predictions regarding the timing and intensity of beneficial light interventions for maintaining circadian alignment.

Indexed as

circadian healthlight exposuresleep

Identifiers

PMID42200968
PMCPMC13214838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.