Cited by 640Sleep and related disordersCircadian rhythm and melatoninSleep and Work-Related Fatigue

Sleep disturbances compared to traditional risk factors for diabetes development: systematic review and meta-analysis

Anothaisintawee, Thunyarat, Reutrakul, Sirimon, Van Cauter, Eve, Thakkinstian, Ammarin·2016·Sleep Medicine Reviews

Abstract

Sleep disturbances [short (<6 h) and long (>8 h) sleeping time, insomnia (initiating or maintaining sleep), obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and abnormal sleep timing] have been associated with increased diabetes risk but the effect size relative to that of traditional risk factors is unknown. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the risk associated with sleep disturbances to traditional risk factors. Studies were identified from Medline and Scopus. Cohort studies measuring the association between sleep disturbances and incident diabetes were eligible. For traditional risk factors (i.e., overweight, family history, and physical inactivity), systematic reviews with or without meta-analysis were included. Thirty-six studies (1,061,555 participants) were included. Pooled relative risks (RRs) of sleep variables were estimated using a random-effect model. Pooled RRs of sleeping ≤5 h, 6 h, and ≥9 h/d were respectively 1.48 (95%CI:1.25,1.76), 1.18 (1.10,1.26) and 1.36 (1.12,1.65). Poor sleep quality, OSA and shift work were associated with diabetes with a pooled RR of 1.40 (1.21,1.63), 2.02 (1.57, 2.61) and 1.40 (1.18,1.66), respectively. The pooled RRs of being overweight, having a family history of diabetes, and being physically inactive were 2.99 (2.42,3.72), 2.33 (1.79,2.79), and 1.20 (1.11,1.32), respectively. In conclusion, the risk of developing diabetes associated with sleep disturbances is comparable to that of traditional risk factors. Sleep disturbances should be considered in clinical guidelines for type 2 diabetes screening.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.smrv.2015.10.002

Cites

95 of 95 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anothaisintawee, T., Reutrakul, S., Van Cauter, E., & Thakkinstian, A.
Affiliations
Mahidol University (TH)
Corresponding author
Reutrakul, Sirimon
Venue
Sleep Medicine Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-12
Volume
30
Pages
11-24
ISSN
1087-0792 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2190174002
Cited by
640
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 40 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 63 · 2023: 70 · 2022: 73 · 2021: 81 · 2020: 55 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 61 · 2017: 64 · 2016: 23
FWCI
6.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Sleep Medicine Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Circadian rhythm and melatonin
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Keywords
sleep disorders, type 2 diabetes, diabetes risk factors, short sleep duration, long sleep, insomnia, obstructive sleep apnea, shift work, poor sleep quality, overweight, family history of diabetes, physical inactivity, diabetes screening
MeSH terms
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Humans, Risk Factors, Sleep, Sleep Wake Disorders, Sleep Apnea, Obstructive

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review