Christopher B Miller1, Christopher J Gordon1, Leanne Toubia2, Delwyn J Bartlett3, Ronald R Grunstein4, Angela L D'Rozario3, Nathaniel S Marshall5. 1. NeuroSleep and Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Sydney Nursing School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 2. NeuroSleep and Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 3. NeuroSleep and Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 4. NeuroSleep and Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Sleep and Respiratory Failure Service, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 5. NeuroSleep and Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Sydney Nursing School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: nathaniel.marshall@sydney.edu.au.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Self-reported habitual sleep duration has been used widely in epidemiologic research, yet this measure remains to be validated. We evaluated whether simple sleep duration questions concord with sleep diaries in an online sample. METHODS: Australian adults aged 18+ years completed an internet survey examining measures of sleep, sociodemographic risk factors, and a 7-day sleep diary. We examined single-question (how many hours of sleep would you normally get?) and 2-question assessments (difference between sleep and wake times) to a 7-day sleep diary estimation of sleep duration. Using Bland-Altman plots and associated statistics, we tested systematic differences, precision, and systematic bias. We also evaluated whether the differences were consistent along the entire range of the measurement and whether they were associated with any sociodemographic risk factors (Spearman rho). RESULTS: Data were analyzed from 1662 participants (67.3% female). Bland-Altman plots displayed visual discrepancies between both 1-question and 2-question reports of sleep duration compared with sleep diaries. Both the single- (-17 minutes) and double-question (8 minutes) sleep duration estimates differed significantly (both P < .001). These simple estimates only agreed to within ±2.5-3 hours compared with diary estimates. The measure was also weakly systematically biased (rho = +0.204 and +0.309, P < .001) through the measurement range. There were significant differences and associations between differences in sleep duration estimation and determinants of health. CONCLUSIONS: Simple questions estimating habitual sleep duration are imprecise and systematically biased in a large online survey. The amount of difference is correlated with well-known sociodemographic risk factors.
INTRODUCTION: Self-reported habitual sleep duration has been used widely in epidemiologic research, yet this measure remains to be validated. We evaluated whether simple sleep duration questions concord with sleep diaries in an online sample. METHODS: Australian adults aged 18+ years completed an internet survey examining measures of sleep, sociodemographic risk factors, and a 7-day sleep diary. We examined single-question (how many hours of sleep would you normally get?) and 2-question assessments (difference between sleep and wake times) to a 7-day sleep diary estimation of sleep duration. Using Bland-Altman plots and associated statistics, we tested systematic differences, precision, and systematic bias. We also evaluated whether the differences were consistent along the entire range of the measurement and whether they were associated with any sociodemographic risk factors (Spearman rho). RESULTS: Data were analyzed from 1662 participants (67.3% female). Bland-Altman plots displayed visual discrepancies between both 1-question and 2-question reports of sleep duration compared with sleep diaries. Both the single- (-17 minutes) and double-question (8 minutes) sleep duration estimates differed significantly (both P < .001). These simple estimates only agreed to within ±2.5-3 hours compared with diary estimates. The measure was also weakly systematically biased (rho = +0.204 and +0.309, P < .001) through the measurement range. There were significant differences and associations between differences in sleep duration estimation and determinants of health. CONCLUSIONS: Simple questions estimating habitual sleep duration are imprecise and systematically biased in a large online survey. The amount of difference is correlated with well-known sociodemographic risk factors.
Authors: Wendy M Troxel; Anthony Rodriguez; Rachana Seelam; Joan S Tucker; Regina A Shih; Lu Dong; Elizabeth J D'Amico Journal: Sleep Date: 2021-10-11 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Lily Chen; Julia L Chapman; Brendon J Yee; Keith K H Wong; Ronald R Grunstein; Nathaniel S Marshall; Christopher B Miller Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-03-08 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Samuel E Jones; Vincent T van Hees; Diego R Mazzotti; Pedro Marques-Vidal; Séverine Sabia; Ashley van der Spek; Hassan S Dashti; Jorgen Engmann; Desana Kocevska; Jessica Tyrrell; Robin N Beaumont; Melvyn Hillsdon; Katherine S Ruth; Marcus A Tuke; Hanieh Yaghootkar; Seth A Sharp; Yingjie Ji; Jamie W Harrison; Rachel M Freathy; Anna Murray; Annemarie I Luik; Najaf Amin; Jacqueline M Lane; Richa Saxena; Martin K Rutter; Henning Tiemeier; Zoltán Kutalik; Meena Kumari; Timothy M Frayling; Michael N Weedon; Philip R Gehrman; Andrew R Wood Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2019-04-05 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Erkki Kronholm; Nathaniel S Marshall; Minna Mänty; Jouni Lahti; Eero Lahelma; Olli Pietiläinen; Ossi Rahkonen; Tea Lallukka Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-10 Impact factor: 3.390