社区样本中共识睡眠日记的评估：与单通道脑电图、活动记录仪和回顾性问卷的比较。
Evaluation of the Consensus Sleep Diary in a community sample: comparison with single-channel electroencephalography, actigraphy, and retrospective questionnaire.
机构信息
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California.
Department of Psychology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
出版信息
J Clin Sleep Med. 2021 Jul 1;17(7):1389-1399. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.9200.
STUDY OBJECTIVES
The Consensus Sleep Diary (CSD) was developed by experts to promote standardization of sleep diary data across the field, but studies comparing the CSD with other assessments of sleep parameters are scarce. This study compared the CSD with 3 other methods to assess sleep duration, efficiency, and timing.
METHODS
Participants (n = 80) were community adults (mean age = 32.65 years, 63% female) who completed the time-stamped CSD and used single-channel electroencephalography (EEG) and actigraphy for 7 days at home, then completed a retrospective sleep questionnaire. Total sleep time (TST), sleep efficiency (SE), and sleep midpoint were compared using correlations, Bland-Altman plots, and limits of agreement (adjusted for repeated measures).
RESULTS
Correlations between the CSD and all methods on TST were large (rs = .63-.75). Adjusted CSD average TST was 40 minutes greater than with EEG and 31 minutes greater than with actigraphy. Correlations between CSD, actigraphy, and EEG for SE were small (rs = .18), and there was a medium correlation with questionnaire (r = .42). Adjusted CSD average SE was 7% greater than EEG and 6% greater than actigraphy; both demonstrated heteroscedasticity. Sleep midpoint correlations between CSD and all methods were large (r = .92-.99). Adjusted CSD was, on average, 6 minutes later than EEG and 1 minute later than actigraphy. Questionnaire-derived sleep parameters demonstrated nonconstant bias; lesser values had positive bias and greater values had negative bias.
CONCLUSIONS
The time-stamped CSD led to meaningful overestimations of TST and SE as measured by objective/inferred methods. However, sleep timing was rather accurately assessed with the CSD in comparison to objective/inferred measures. Researchers should carefully consider which sleep assessment methods are best aligned with their research question and parameters of interest, as methods do not demonstrate complete agreement.
研究目的
共识睡眠日记（CSD）由专家开发，旨在促进整个领域睡眠日记数据的标准化，但比较 CSD 与其他睡眠参数评估方法的研究很少。本研究比较了 CSD 与其他 3 种方法来评估睡眠持续时间、效率和时间。
方法
参与者（n=80）为社区成年人（平均年龄=32.65 岁，63%为女性），他们在家中完成了时间标记的 CSD，并使用单通道脑电图（EEG）和活动记录仪进行了 7 天的记录，然后完成了一份回顾性睡眠问卷。使用相关性、Bland-Altman 图和一致性界限（针对重复测量进行调整）比较总睡眠时间（TST）、睡眠效率（SE）和睡眠中点。
结果
CSD 与所有方法在 TST 上的相关性均较大（rs=0.63-0.75）。调整后的 CSD 平均 TST 比 EEG 多 40 分钟，比活动记录仪多 31 分钟。CSD、活动记录仪和 EEG 之间的 SE 相关性较小（rs=0.18），与问卷的相关性中等（r=0.42）。调整后的 CSD 平均 SE 比 EEG 高 7%，比活动记录仪高 6%；两者均表现出异方差性。CSD 与所有方法之间的睡眠中点相关性均较大（r=0.92-0.99）。调整后的 CSD 平均比 EEG 晚 6 分钟，比活动记录仪晚 1 分钟。问卷衍生的睡眠参数表现出非恒定偏差；较小的值具有正偏差，较大的值具有负偏差。
结论
与客观/推断方法相比，时间标记的 CSD 导致 TST 和 SE 的测量值出现有意义的高估。然而，与客观/推断测量值相比，CSD 相当准确地评估了睡眠时间。研究人员应仔细考虑哪些睡眠评估方法最符合他们的研究问题和感兴趣的参数，因为这些方法并非完全一致。
Zotero 插件