CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 209Sleep and related disordersSleep and Wakefulness ResearchSleep and Work-Related Fatigue

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A comparison of subjective estimates of sleep with objective polysomnographic data in healthy men and women

Baker, Fiona C, Maloney, Shane, Driver, Helen S·1999·Journal of Psychosomatic Research
DOI 10.1016/s0022-3999(99)00017-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Twenty healthy men and women had their sleep recorded objectively, using polysomnography on 3 nonconsecutive nights. Following each night, the subjects assessed their sleep onset latency and number of awakenings, subjectively. Self-ratings were compared with objective measures of sleep onset latency (SOL), calculated as the time from lights-out to the first continuous minute of stage 2 sleep, and the number of awakenings which lasted 1 minute or longer on the polysomnograms. Apart from the first night, the subjects overestimated the time that it took them to fall asleep, despite sleep onset being scored as the latency to stage 2, rather than stage 1 sleep. On all 3 nights, the subjects underestimated the number of awakenings when compared to objective criteria. Although the subjects were consistent in their errors of estimation of their sleep compared to polysomnographic assessments over the three nights, the between-individual variation was large, so that objective and subjective ratings of SOL and awakenings were not correlated. The young men and women in our study, who were free of medication or sleep complaints, perceived their sleep inaccurately when compared to objective polysomnographic recordings.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0022-3999(99)00017-3

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

  • Discrepancies between self-report and objective measures of sleep are common.

    “However, discrepancies between self-report and objective measures of sleep are common [38–42] and there is a tendency for people with insomnia to overestimate how long it takes them to get to sleep and also to underestimate the total amount of time that they spend asleep, relative to objective measures [43].”

    From A structural equation model of the relationship between insomnia, negative affect, and paranoid thinking (2017) · cites this paper as [40]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Bixler, 1973, A comparison of subjective estimates and objective laboratory findings in insomniac patients, Sleep Res, 2, 143
  2. Carskadon MA, Sharkey M. Societal impact of sleep disorders and insufficient sleep. In: Flanigan MJ, ed. Dealing with sleep disorders: a female health perspective for family physicians. A Ribosome Communications publication, Toronto. J Soc Obstet Gynecol (Canada) 1993;15:5–9.
  3. Thornby, 1974, Once more thrice, Sleep Res, 3, 91

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Baker, F. C., Maloney, S., & Driver, H. S.
Affiliations
University of the Witwatersrand (ZA)
Corresponding author
Baker, Fiona C
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Psychosomatic Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-10
Volume
47
Issue
4
Pages
335-341
ISSN
0022-3999 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0022-3999(99)00017-3
OpenAlex
W2151158623
Cited by
209
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of Psychosomatic Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Keywords
sleep latency, sleep awakenings, polysomnography, self-assessment accuracy, healthy adults, sex differences, stage 2 sleep
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Individuality, Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders, Male, Reference Values, Self-Assessment, Observer Variation, Polysomnography, Statistics, Nonparametric

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