SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2026
Measurement properties of Arabic-validated sleep quality instruments: a COSMIN-based systematic review from the BRIDGE Project.
Synthesis 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sleep quality is a multidimensional and inherently subjective construct that plays a fundamental role in physical and mental health. Numerous self-report instruments have been developed to assess subjective sleep quality; however, their cross-cultural validity must be established before use in different linguistic contexts. Objective: The objective was to systematically identify the Arabic-validated sleep quality instruments and to critically evaluate their methodological quality and psychometric properties in accordance with COSMIN standards. Methods: This systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA-COSMIN guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception to December 2025. Studies reporting the translation, cross-cultural adaptation, or validation of sleep quality instruments in Arabic were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. Measurement properties were evaluated according to COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties. Results: Fifteen validation studies conducted across seven Arab countries and one general Arabic-speaking cohort were included. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index was the most extensively validated instrument ( Conclusion: Multiple sleep quality instruments are available for use in Arabic-speaking populations. However, none demonstrated comprehensive evaluation across all COSMIN-recommended measurement properties. Instrument selection should be guided by both psychometric evidence and conceptual alignment with the intended context of use. Future validation studies should prioritize responsiveness, measurement error estimation, and formal cross-cultural invariance testing to strengthen the evidence base for sleep quality assessment in Arabic contexts. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420261328016, Identifier CRD420261328016.
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.