Cited by 53Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome ResearchSleep and related disordersSleep and Wakefulness Research

Perception versus polysomnographic assessment of sleep in CFS and non-fatigued control subjects: results from a population-based study.

Open access
Majer, Matthias, Jones, James F, Unger, Elizabeth R, Youngblood, Laura Solomon, Decker, Michael J, Gurbaxani, Brian, Heim, Christine, Reeves, William C·2007·BMC Neurology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Complaints of unrefreshing sleep are a prominent component of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS); yet, polysomnographic studies have not consistently documented sleep abnormalities in CFS patients. We conducted this study to determine whether alterations in objective sleep characteristics are associated with subjective measures of poor sleep quality in persons with CFS. METHODS: We examined the relationship between perceived sleep quality and polysomnographic measures of nighttime and daytime sleep in 35 people with CFS and 40 non-fatigued control subjects, identified from the general population of Wichita, Kansas and defined by empiric criteria. Perceived sleep quality and daytime sleepiness were assessed using clinical sleep questionnaires. Objective sleep characteristics were assessed by nocturnal polysomnography and daytime multiple sleep latency testing. RESULTS: Participants with CFS reported unrefreshing sleep and problems sleeping during the preceding month significantly more often than did non-fatigued controls. Participants with CFS also rated their quality of sleep during the overnight sleep study as significantly worse than did control subjects. Control subjects reported significantly longer sleep onset latency than latency to fall asleep as measured by PSG and MSLT. There were no significant differences in sleep pathology or architecture between subjects with CFS and control subjects. CONCLUSION: People with CFS reported sleep problems significantly more often than control subjects. Yet, when measured these parameters and sleep architecture did not differ between the two subject groups. A unique finding requiring further study is that control, but not CFS subjects, significantly over reported sleep latency suggesting CFS subjects may have an increased appreciation of sleep behaviour that may contribute to their perception of sleep problems.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2377-7-40

Cites

39 of 39 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?

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

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. NIH State-of-the-Science Conference Statement on manifestations and management of chronic insomnia in adults NIH Consens State Sci Statements 2005 22 1 30 17308547
  2. American Academy of Sleep Medicine International classification of sleep disorders, 2nd edition: Diagnostic and coding manual 2005 Westchester, Illinois: American Academy of Sleep Medicine
  3. American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision 2000 Washington DC, American Psychiatric Association

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Majer, M., Jones, J. F., Unger, E. R., Youngblood, L. S., Decker, M. J., Gurbaxani, B., Heim, C., & Reeves, W. C.
Affiliations
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • Emory University (US)
Corresponding author
Reeves, William C
Venue
BMC Neurology
Published
2007-12
Volume
7
Issue
1
Pages
40-40
ISSN
1471-2377 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2132486903
Cited by
53
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMC Neurology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Emory University
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • School of Medicine, Emory University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
Keywords
chronic fatigue syndrome, subjective sleep quality, unrefreshing sleep, sleep latency, sleep architecture, sleep complaints, polysomnography, daytime sleepiness
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patients, Perception, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sleep, Sleep Wake Disorders, Sleep Stages, Fatigue Syndrome, Chronic, Polysomnography

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