Cited by 150Sleep and related disordersSleep and Work-Related FatigueHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 80 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 4 of the 8 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Sleep disruption in medicine students and its relationship with impaired academic performance: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Open access
Seoane, Hernan A., Moschetto, Leandra, Orliacq, Francisco, Orliacq, Josefina, Serrano, Ezequiel, Cazenave, María Inés, Vigo, Daniel E., Perez-Lloret, Santiago·2020·Sleep Medicine Reviews

Abstract

Sleep disruption severely impairs learning ability, affecting academic performance in students. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed at assessing the prevalence of sleep disruption in medical students and its relationship with academic performance. PubMed, Web of Sciences, EBSCO and SciELO databases searches allowed to retrieve 41 papers with data about the prevalence of sleep deprivation, 20 of which also contained data on its association with academic performance. Poor sleep quality was reported by 5646 out of 14,170 students in 29 studies (39.8%, 95% confidence interval = 39.0-40.6%), insufficient sleep duration by 3762/12,906 students in 28 studies (29.1%, 23.3-29.9%) and excessive diurnal sleepiness by 1324/3688 students in 13 studies (35.9%, 34.3-37.4). Academic grades correlated significantly with sleep quality scores (r, 95% CI = 0.15, 0.05-0.26, random-effects model; p = 0.002, n = 10,420 subjects, k = 15 studies) and diurnal sleepiness (r = -0.12, -0.19/-0.06 under the fixed effects model, p < 0.001, n = 1539, k = 6), but not with sleep duration (r = 0.03, -0.12/0.17 under the random-effects model, p = 0.132, n = 2469, k = 9). These findings advocate for an urgent intervention aiming at improving sleep quality among medical students as a way of increasing academic achievements and, ultimately, the quality of health care.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This systematic review and meta-analysis of medical students found that poor sleep quality, short sleep duration, and daytime sleepiness were common, and that worse sleep quality and greater sleepiness—but not shorter sleep—were associated with lower academic performance. The authors recommend routine sleep assessment and sleep-hygiene education for medical students.

Key findings

  • Pooled prevalence estimates were 39.8% for poor sleep quality (5,646/14,170; 95% CI 39.0–40.6%; k=28), 29.1% for insufficient sleep duration (3,762/12,906; 95% CI 28.3–29.9%; k=21), and 35.9% for excessive daytime sleepiness (1,324/3,688; 95% CI 34.3–37.4%; k=13).
  • Better sleep quality correlated with better academic performance: r=0.15 (95% CI 0.05–0.26; p=0.002; 15 studies; n=10,420), with significant heterogeneity (I²=90.23%).
  • Sleep duration was not significantly related to academic performance: r=0.03 (95% CI −0.12–0.17; p=0.67; 9 studies; n=2,469).
  • Greater daytime sleepiness was associated with worse academic performance: r=−0.12 (95% CI −0.19 to −0.06; p<0.001; 6 studies; n=1,539). Subgroup analyses found stronger sleep-quality correlations in the Middle East and Asia/Oceania, in studies from 2012 or later, and where women made up more than half the sample; sleep-duration correlations were stronger in studies with fewer than 150 students.

Methods

  • Systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA, registered as PROSPERO CRD42019127734; searches covered PubMed, Web of Sciences, EBSCO, and SciELO from 1980 to 2018, plus reference-list checks, in English, Spanish, French, or Portuguese.
  • Inclusion required medical students or mixed medical/related-career samples, at least one subjective or objective sleep measure covering more than one night, and academic performance data; 2,332 records were initially retrieved plus 21 from secondary searches, yielding 41 studies for prevalence and 20 for performance associations.
  • All included studies were cross-sectional. Effect sizes were Pearson correlations between sleep measures and academic performance, transformed to Fisher’s z, pooled with fixed- or random-effects models using Meta-Essentials; heterogeneity was assessed with Q and I², and publication bias with funnel plots and Egger regression.

Limitations

  • Stated by the authors: female medical students may have been overrepresented; heterogeneity was significant for sleep quality and sleep duration relationships; no study used objective sleep measures; performance and sleep assessments were not standardized; demographic and comorbidity data were insufficient for moderator analyses; organic sleep disorders were not assessed; and a stronger sleep-duration correlation in small studies suggested possible publication bias.
  • Evident from the text: because every included study was cross-sectional, the analyses cannot establish whether sleep disruption causes worse academic performance or vice versa.
  • Evident from the text: reliance on self-reported sleep measures and varied definitions of academic performance limits comparability across studies and may contribute to the high heterogeneity observed.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.smrv.2020.101333

Cites

80 of 80 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

64 Own result · 9 Own method · 2 Own interpretation · 1 Supported · 1 Supported so far · 1 Partly supported · 1 No full text of the sources · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 67 claims

  • Probably not a substantial claim. 9
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 4
12 of 12

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Show all 82 references

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Escobar-Córdoba, 2011, Somnolencia durna excesiva en estudiantes de noveno semestre de medicina de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Rev Fac Med, 59, 191
  2. Pérez-Olmos, 2006, Ritmos circadianos de sueño y rendimiento académico en estudiantes de medicina, Rev Cien Salud, 4, 147
  3. Priya, 2017, Study of the factors associated with poor sleep among medical students, IJBAMR, 6, 422

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Seoane, H. A., Moschetto, L., Orliacq, F., Orliacq, J., Serrano, E., Cazenave, M. I., Vigo, D. E., & Perez-Lloret, S.
Affiliations
  • Pontificia Universidad Católica Argentina (AR)
  • Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (AR)
Venue
Sleep Medicine Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-10
Volume
53
Pages
101333
ISSN
1087-0792 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3024810966
Cited by
150
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4
FWCI
1.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sleep Medicine Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Americanae (AECID Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion)
  • Conicet (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Keywords
sleep disruption, medical students, academic performance, sleep deprivation, sleep quality, insufficient sleep duration, excessive daytime sleepiness, learning ability, sleep interventions
MeSH terms
Academic Success, Humans, Disorders of Excessive Somnolence, Sleep Deprivation, Students, Medical

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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