Sleep During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Longitudinal Observational Study Combining Multisensor Data With Questionnaires
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic prompted various containment strategies, such as work-from-home policies and reduced social contact, which significantly altered people's sleep routines. While previous studies have highlighted the negative impacts of these restrictions on sleep, they often lack a comprehensive perspective that considers other factors, such as seasonal variations and physical activity (PA), which can also influence sleep. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to longitudinally examine the detailed changes in sleep patterns among working adults during the COVID-19 pandemic using a combination of repeated questionnaires and high-resolution passive measurements from wearable sensors. We investigate the association between sleep and 5 sets of variables: (1) demographics; (2) sleep-related habits; (3) PA behaviors; and external factors, including (4) pandemic-specific constraints and (5) seasonal variations during the study period. METHODS: We recruited working adults in Finland for a 1-year study (June 2021-June 2022) conducted during the late stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. We collected multisensor data from fitness trackers worn by participants, as well as work and sleep-related measures through monthly questionnaires. Additionally, we used the Stringency Index for Finland at various points in time to estimate the degree of pandemic-related lockdown restrictions during the study period. We applied linear mixed models to examine changes in sleep patterns during this late stage of the pandemic and their association with the 5 sets of variables. RESULTS: The sleep patterns of 27,350 nights from 112 working adults were analyzed. Stricter pandemic measures were associated with an increase in total sleep time (TST) (β=.003, 95% CI 0.001-0.005; P<.001) and a delay in midsleep (MS) (β=.02, 95% CI 0.02-0.03; P<.001). Individuals who tend to snooze exhibited greater variability in both TST (β=.15, 95% CI 0.05-0.27; P=.006) and MS (β=.17, 95% CI 0.03-0.31; P=.01). Occupational differences in sleep pattern were observed, with service staff experiencing longer TST (β=.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.61; P=.004) and lower variability in TST (β=-.15, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.05; P<.001). Engaging in PA later in the day was associated with longer TST (β=.03, 95% CI 0.02-0.04; P<.001) and less variability in TST (β=-.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.00; P=.02). Higher intradaily variability in rest activity rhythm was associated with shorter TST (β=-.26, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.23; P<.001), earlier MS (β=-.29, 95% CI -0.33 to -0.26; P<.001), and reduced variability in TST (β=-.16, 95% CI -0.23 to -0.09; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study provided a comprehensive view of the factors affecting sleep patterns during the late stage of the pandemic. As we navigate the future of work after the pandemic, understanding how work arrangements, lifestyle choices, and sleep quality interact will be crucial for optimizing well-being and performance in the workforce.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».