Cited by 53Sleep and related disordersSleep and Work-Related FatigueCircadian rhythm and melatonin

Determinants of perceived sleep quality in normal sleepers

Open access
Goelema, M. S., Regis, M., Haakma, R., van den Heuvel, E. R., Markopoulos, P., Overeem, S.·2019·Behavioral Sleep Medicine

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to establish the determinants of perceived sleep quality over a longer period of time, taking into account the separate contributions of actigraphy-based sleep measures and self-reported sleep indices. Methods: Fifty participants (52 ± 6.6 years; 27 females) completed two consecutive weeks of home monitoring, during which they kept a sleep–wake diary while their sleep was monitored using a wrist-worn actigraph. The diary included questions on perceived sleep quality, sleep–wake information, and additional factors such as well-being and stress. The data were analyzed using multilevel models to compare a model that included only actigraphy-based sleep measures (model Acti) to a model that included only self-reported sleep measures to explain perceived sleep quality (model Self). In addition, a model based on the self-reported sleep measures and extended with nonsleep-related factors was analyzed to find the most significant determinants of perceived sleep quality (model Extended). Results: Self-reported sleep measures (model Self) explained 61% of the total variance, while actigraphy-based sleep measures (model Acti) only accounted for 41% of the perceived sleep quality. The main predictors in the self-reported model were number of awakenings during the night, sleep onset latency, and wake time after sleep onset. In the extended model, the number of awakenings during the night and total sleep time of the previous night were the strongest determinants of perceived sleep quality, with 64% of the variance explained. Conclusion: In our cohort, perceived sleep quality was mainly determined by self-reported sleep measures and less by actigraphy-based sleep indices. These data further stress the importance of taking multiple nights into account when trying to understand perceived sleep quality.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15402002.2017.1376205

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Perceptions of sleep capture individual outcomes, which have a strong influence in driving behavioural decision making.

    “Regardless, perceptions of sleep capture individual outcomes, which have a strong in fl uence in driving behavioural decision making [79].”

    From The effect of caffeine on subsequent sleep: A systematic review and meta-analysis (2023) · cites this paper as [79]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says people interpret their sleep individually and that perceived sleep experience may affect other parts of life, such as daytime functioning. It does not establish that sleep perceptions strongly influence behavioural decision-making. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Krystal, A. D., & Edinger, J. D. (2008). Measuring sleep quality. Sleep Medicine, the Art of Good Sleep: Proceedings from the 5th International Sleep Disorders Forum: Novel Outcome Measures of Sleep, Sleep Loss and Insomnia, 9(Suppl 1), S10-S17.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goelema, M. S., Regis, M., Haakma, R., van den Heuvel, E. R., Markopoulos, P., & Overeem, S.
Affiliations
  • Eindhoven University of Technology (NL)
  • Personal Health Group, Philips Group Innovation Research, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
  • Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
  • Kempenhaeghe (NL)
Corresponding author
Goelema, M. S.
Venue
Behavioral Sleep Medicine
Published
2017-10-12
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
388-397
ISSN
  • 1540-2002 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-2010
OpenAlex
W2755159264
Cited by
53
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3
FWCI
3.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioral Sleep Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TU/e Research Portal (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • TU/e Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • POINT ONE, a government agency providing general funding for the project
  • Royal Philips, a commercial sponsor providing general funding for the (PhD) project
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Circadian rhythm and melatonin
Keywords
subjective sleep quality, actigraphy, self-reported sleep, sleep awakenings, sleep latency, wake after sleep onset, total sleep time, well-being, stress
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Sleep, Cohort Studies, Actigraphy, Self Report

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