Objective measurement of sleep by smartphone application: comparison with actigraphy and relation to self-reported sleep
Files
Published version
Date
2021-10-31
Authors
Maynard, Taylor
Appleman, Erica Rose
Cronin-Golomb, Alice
Neargarder, Sandy
Version
Published version
OA Version
Citation
T. Maynard, E. Appleman, A. Cronin-Golomb, S. Neargarder. "Objective measurement of sleep by smartphone application: Comparison with actigraphy and relation to self-reported sleep." Exploration of Medicine, Volume 2, https://doi.org/10.37349/emed.2021.00057
Abstract
AIM: Smartphone technology is increasingly used by the public to assess sleep. Specific features of some sleep-tracking applications are comparable to actigraphy in objectively monitoring sleep. The clinical utility of smartphone apps should be investigated further to increase access to convenient means of monitoring sleep.
METHODS: Smartphone and subjective sleep measures were administered to 29 community-dwelling healthy adults [aged 20–67, Mean (M) = 26.8; 18 women, 11 men], and actigraphy to 19 of them. Total sleep time (TST) and sleep efficiency were measured with actigraphy and the Sleep Time App (Azumio Inc.). Sleep diaries captured subjective TST and sleep efficiency, and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index provided self-report data. An exit questionnaire was administered to examine App feasibility and likelihood of future use.
RESULTS: The App significantly overestimated TST when compared to actigraphy. There was no significant difference in sleep efficiency between methodologies. There was also no significant difference between TST recorded through the App and through sleep diaries. Participants’ self-reported ease of use of the smartphone App positively correlated with likelihood of future use.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current findings, future research is needed to investigate the utility and feasibility of multiple smartphone applications in monitoring sleep in healthy and clinical populations.
Description
License
Copyright: © The Author(s) 2021. This is an Open Access article licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, for any purpose, even commercially, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.