Cited by 88Sleep and related disordersSleep and Work-Related FatigueCircadian rhythm and melatonin

Sleep Duration/Quality with Health Outcomes: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Prospective Studies

Open access
Gao, Chang, Guo, Jiao, Gong, Ting-Ting, Lv, Jia-Le, Li, Xin-Yu, Liu, Fang-Hua, Zhang, Meng, Shan, Yi-Tong +2 more·2022·Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract

Background: To quantitatively evaluate the evidence of duration and quality of sleep as measured by multiple health outcomes. Methods: This review is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42021235587. We systematically searched three databases from inception until November 15, 2020. For each meta-analysis, the summary effect size using fixed and random effects models, the 95% confidence interval, and the 95% prediction interval were assessed; heterogeneity, evidence of small-study effects, and excess significance bias were also estimated. According to the above metrics, we evaluated the credibility of each association. Results: A total of 85 meta-analyses with 36 health outcomes were included in the study. We observed highly suggestive evidence for an association between long sleep and an increased risk of all-cause mortality. Moreover, suggestive evidence supported the associations between long sleep and 5 increased risk of health outcomes (stroke, dyslipidaemia, mortality of coronary heart disease, stroke mortality, and the development or death of stroke); short sleep and increased risk of overweight and/or obesity; poor sleep quality and increased risk of diabetes mellitus and gestational diabetes mellitus. Conclusions: Only the evidence of the association of long sleep with an increased risk of all-cause mortality was graded as highly suggestive. Additional studies are needed to be conducted. Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42021235587

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This umbrella review of 36 articles and 85 meta-analyses found only long sleep duration with increased all-cause mortality reached highly suggestive evidence; other sleep-duration/quality associations were mostly suggestive, weak, or unconfirmed. It assessed 36 health outcomes using fixed/random effects, prediction intervals, heterogeneity, small-study effects, excess significance, and AMSTAR-1 quality appraisal.

Key findings

  • The review included 36 articles, 85 meta-analyses, and 36 health outcomes; the median number of original studies per meta-analysis was 7 (range 3–27), median cases 4,848 (range 156–219,518), and median participants 113,226 (range 1,230–2,311,390).
  • Only long sleep duration with increased all-cause mortality was graded highly suggestive; no association reached convincing evidence. The abstract reports suggestive evidence for long sleep with five outcomes (stroke, dyslipidaemia, mortality of coronary heart disease, stroke mortality, and development or death of stroke), short sleep with overweight and/or obesity, and poor sleep quality with diabetes mellitus and gestational diabetes mellitus.
  • 52 of 85 meta-analyses (61%) were nominally significant at P < 0.05 under random effects. For sleep duration, 10/78 (13%) random-effects estimates were significant at P < 1×10−6 and 28/78 (36%) fixed-effects estimates were significant; for sleep quality, none of 7 random-effects estimates reached P < 1×10−6 and 3/7 (43%) fixed-effects estimates were significant.
  • Heterogeneity was I2 ≤ 50% in 44/78 (56%) sleep-duration meta-analyses, 50–75% in 28/78 (36%), and >75% in 6/78 (8%). Small-study effects were found in 21/78 (27%) duration and 2/7 (29%) quality meta-analyses; excess significance in 22/78 (28%) and 3/7 (43%), respectively.

Methods

  • Umbrella review registered with PROSPERO CRD42021235587; searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science from inception to November 15, 2020, for systematic reviews/meta-analyses of prospective studies on sleep duration/quality and any health outcome.
  • Included 36 articles covering 85 meta-analyses and 36 outcomes; extracted effect sizes (OR/RR/HR), 95% CIs, cases/population, and assessed fixed/random effects, 95% prediction intervals, I2 heterogeneity, Egger’s test for small-study effects, excess significance bias, and AMSTAR-1 methodological quality.
  • Evidence was graded as convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, or weak using criteria based on P-value thresholds, number of cases, largest-study significance, prediction intervals, small-study effects, and excess significance.

Limitations

  • The paper states it found no convincing evidence; 39% of associations (n = 33) were rated weak or not confirmed, and further research is needed. It also states there is no rigorous evidence that lengthening or shortening sleep duration reduces these outcomes.
  • The paper states limited studies prevented subgroup analyses (e.g., age, sex, geographical location) and sensitivity analyses; many meta-analyses lacked dose-response information and compared high vs. low sleep duration without defining thresholds.
  • The paper states it included only published meta-analyses of prospective studies with available data, excluding RCTs, and for sleep quality only included meta-analyses using the PSQI. It also did not examine errors of the meta-analyses or quality of primary studies. Evident from the design: the included evidence is observational, limiting causal inference.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fmed.2021.813943

Cites

117 of 117 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 19 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Suggestive evidence supports an association between short sleep and increased risk of overweight and/or obesity.

    “short sleep and increased risk of overweight and/or obesity;”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    For coronary heart disease, per 1-h reduction was graded as weak evidence.

    “| Coronary heart disease | Per 1-h reduction | <0.05 but >0.001 | 58 (29–75) | (0.93–1.23) | 0.097 | 5/5.09 | 0.961 | No | Yes/No | Weak |”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Suggestive evidence supports an association between long sleep and increased risk of mortality of coronary heart disease.

    “Moreover, suggestive evidence supported the associations between long sleep and 5 increased risk of health outcomes (stroke, dyslipidaemia, mortality of coronary heart disease, stroke mortality, and the development or death of stroke);”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Highly suggestive evidence supports an association between long sleep and an increased risk of all-cause mortality.

    “We observed highly suggestive evidence for an association between long sleep and an increased risk of all-cause mortality.”
    • Also stated in: § Conclusions · plain
      “Only the evidence of the association of long sleep with an increased risk of all-cause mortality was graded as highly suggestive.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Suggestive evidence supports an association between long sleep and increased risk of stroke mortality.

    “Moreover, suggestive evidence supported the associations between long sleep and 5 increased risk of health outcomes (stroke, dyslipidaemia, mortality of coronary heart disease, stroke mortality, and the development or death of stroke);”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 12
  • May combine two claims. 21
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The case number exceeded 1,000 in 81 meta-analyses.

    “The case number exceeded 1,000 in 81 meta-analyses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Ten meta-analyses had 95% prediction intervals excluding the null value, including cognitive disorders, stroke, diabetes, all cancer mortality, all-cause mortality, mortality (both all-cause and cause-specific), stroke mortality, obesity, overweight and/or obesity, and the development or death of stroke.

    “When 95% PIs were evaluated, we found that 10 meta-analyses [cognitive disorders, stroke, diabetes, all cancer mortality, all-cause mortality, mortality (both all-cause and cause-specific), stroke mortality, obesity, overweight and/or obesity, and the development or death of stroke] excluded the null value (Table 2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Of 78 meta-analyses from 32 articles regarding sleep duration, summary random effects estimates were significant at P < 1 × 10−6 in 10 (13%), and summary fixed effects estimates were significant in 28 (36%).

    “Of the 78 meta-analyses from 32 articles regarding sleep duration, the summary random effects estimates were significant at P < 1 × 10−6 in 10 (13%) meta-analyses, and the summary fixed effects estimates were significant in 28 (36%) meta-analyses (Supplementary Table S4).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For sleep quality, the studies with the smallest standard error for each association suggested that 5 of 7 were significant at P < 0.05, and a more conservative effect than the summary random effects was observed in 5 (71%) meta-analyses.

    “The studies with the smallest standard error for each association suggested that 5 of 7 were significant at P < 0.05, and a more conservative effect than the summary random effects was observed in 5 (71%) meta-analyses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    The umbrella review included 36 articles covering 85 meta-analyses and 36 health outcomes.

    “A total of 85 meta-analyses with 36 health outcomes were included in the study.”
    • Also stated in: § Study Selection · plain
      “Ultimately, 36 articles were included in our umbrella review for analysis.”
    • Also stated in: § Characteristics of Included Meta-Analyses · plain
      “These included studies covered 85 meta-analyses, which reported associations between duration and quality of sleep and 36 different outcomes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Out of 7 meta-analyses from 5 articles regarding sleep quality, summary fixed-effects and random-effects estimates were significant at P < 0.05, but at P < 1 × 10−6 random effects were not significant in any, and 3 (43%) produced significant fixed-effects results.

    “Out of the 7 meta-analyses from 5 articles regarding sleep quality, the summary fixed-effects and random-effects estimates were significant at P < 0.05. However, when we used (P < 1 × 10−6) as a threshold for significance, the summary random effects estimates were not significant in any meta-analyses, and 3 (43%) meta-analyses produced significant summary results using the fixed-effects methods (S”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Thirty-nine (50%) sleep-duration meta-analyses reported that the largest study effect was nominally statistically significant (P < 0.05), and a more conservative effect than the summary random effects was observed in 57 (73%) meta-analyses.

    “Thirty-nine (50%) meta-analyses reported that the largest study effect was nominally statistically significant, with a P < 0.05, and a more conservative effect than the summary random effects was observed in 57 (73%) meta-analyses.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In all included studies regarding sleep duration, approximately 44 (56%) had I2 ≤ 50%, 28 (36%) had I2 between 50 and 75%, and 6 (8%) had I2 > 75%.

    “In all the included studies regarding sleep duration, approximately 44 (56%) studies had a lower heterogeneity, with I2 ≤ 50%; approximately 28 (36%) studies had substantial heterogeneity estimates, with I2 between 50 and 75%; and 6 (8%) studies had considerable heterogeneity estimates, with I2 > 75% (Table 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For sleep duration, 15% of studies were rated high, 79% moderate, and 6% low by AMSTAR-1.

    “The studies were rated at three levels: 15% were rated as “high,” 79% were rated as “moderate,” and 6% were classified as “low.””
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The common flaws in the included meta-analyses were that gray literature was not considered in the literature search (item 4) and the list of excluded studies was not presented (item 5).

    “The common flaws were that gray literature was not considered in the literature search (item 4), and the list of excluded studies was not presented (item 5).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For sleep quality, approximately 40% of studies were rated high, 60% moderate, and none low by AMSTAR-1.

    “Approximately 40% were rated as being of “high,” 60% as “moderate” quality, and no meta-analysis was categorized into low quality according to the AMSTAR-1 criteria.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Many meta-analyses lacked dose-response information and compared high vs. low sleep duration without defining thresholds for these categories.

    “Many meta-analyses lacked dose-response information and compared high vs. low sleep duration without defining thresholds for these categories.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The umbrella review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews, Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) statement.

    “The umbrella review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews, Meta-Analyses guidelines (Supplementary Table S1) (6), and the guidance of the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology statement (Supplementary Table S2) (7).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [6] Moher, 2009, Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement, PLoS Med. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [7] Stroup, 2000, Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology (MOOSE) group, JAMA. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The umbrella review is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42021235587.

    “This review is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42021235587.”
    • Also stated in: § Methods · plain
      “The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (registration number: CRD42021235587).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    Two investigators independently extracted data from the included studies using a custom-made data extraction form, and discrepancies were verified by a third author.

    “Two investigators (X-YL and F-HL) independently extracted the related data from the included studies using a custom-made data extraction form. In the case of discrepancies, the data were subsequently verified by a third author (CG).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched systematically from inception until November 15, 2020.

    “The electronic databases, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Web of Science were searched systematically from inception until November 15, 2020, to identify related systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Two investigators independently rated the methodological quality of included systematic reviews and meta-analyses with the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-1) tool.

    “To study the quality of the reporting of the included systematic reviews and meta-analyses, two investigators (CG and X-YL) independently rated the methodological quality with the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR-1) tool.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Two authors independently scrutinized articles based on titles and abstracts, and disagreements were resolved by discussion and consensus with a senior advisor.

    “Two authors (CG and X-YL) independently scrutinized articles based on titles and abstracts. If needed, full articles were retrieved for a final decision. Disagreements between the two reviewers were resolved by discussion and consensus with a senior advisor (T-TG).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Self-reported short or long sleep duration and poor sleep quality may be consistently associated with adverse health outcomes.

    “self-reported short or long sleep duration (often defined as <6 or 7 and >8 or 9 h, respectively) and poor sleep quality [Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) > 5] may be consistently associated with adverse health outcomes”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [2] Roncoroni, 2021, The association of sleep duration and feeling rested with health in US Hispanic women, Sleep Med. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [3] Park, 2021, Short or long sleep duration and CKD: a Mendelian Randomization Study, J Am Soc Nephrol. source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites [4] Blair, 2015, Poor sleep quality and associated inflammation predict preterm birth: heightened risk among African Americans, Sleep. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The umbrella review used the criteria of evidence grading to evaluate the evidence categorization.

    “We also used the criteria of evidence grading to evaluate the evidence categorization.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The relationship between abnormal duration or quality of sleep and other outcomes could be genuine, but there is still limited evidence for them.

    “The relationship between abnormal duration or quality of sleep and other outcomes could be genuine, but there is still limited evidence for them.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The umbrella review searched three databases through a rigorous strategy, and two authors independently extracted the information.

    “In addition, we searched three databases through a rigorous strategy, and two authors independently extracted the information.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The umbrella review only evaluated published meta-analyses of prospective studies with available data; meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials were not included.

    “Thirdly, we only evaluated published meta-analyses of prospective studies with available data, therefore, meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials were not included in our study.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The umbrella review used standardized criteria to explore the extent of heterogeneity and potential bias among the included studies and further assessed the strength of claimed associations to identify which was the most credible evidence.

    “We used standardized criteria to explore the extent of heterogeneity and potential bias among the included studies and further assessed the strength of claimed associations to identify which was the most credible evidence.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The umbrella review did not examine any error of the meta-analyses or the quality of the primary studies.

    “Lastly, we did not examine any error of the meta-analyses or the quality of the primary studies, as these were beyond the scope of our umbrella review.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Depressive symptoms, low socioeconomic status, low level of physical activity, unemployment, undiagnosed health conditions, poor general health, and cancer-related fatigue have all been shown to be associated with long sleep.

    “In particular, depressive symptoms, low socioeconomic status, low level of physical activity, unemployment, undiagnosed health conditions, poor general health, and cancer-related fatigue have all been shown to be associated with long sleep (64).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [64] Stranges, 2008, Correlates of short and long sleep duration: a cross-cultural comparison between the United Kingdom and the United States: the Whitehall II Study and the Western New York Health Study, Am J Epidemiol. source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    For sleep quality, only systematic reviews and meta-analyses assessing sleep quality by the PSQI questionnaire were included.

    “Fourthly, for sleep quality, only systematic reviews and meta-analyses assessing sleep quality by the PSQI questionnaire were included in this umbrella review.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
27 of 27
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A quantitative appraisal of epidemiological credibility is lacking, as are examinations of potential bias between sleep quantity/quality and health outcomes and assessments of the most influential outcomes.

    “Although previous studies have examined this topic using various methodologies, a quantitative appraisal of epidemiological credibility is lacking, as are examinations of the potential bias between the quantity and quality of sleep and health-related outcomes and assessments of the most influential outcomes.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The associations between sleep duration or quality and health outcomes reflect causal effects.

    “Abnormal duration or quality of sleep is harmful to human health, but further high-quality prospective studies and better designed trials are needed to generate definite conclusions.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The included meta-analyses provide valid estimates of the associations between sleep and health outcomes.

    “Lastly, we did not examine any error of the meta-analyses or the quality of the primary studies, as these were beyond the scope of our umbrella review.”
3 of 3

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?

  • Sleep data were correlated with health outcomes such as cardiovascular health, obesity, and type 2 diabetes.

    “Furthermore, sleep data were correlated with various health outcomes, such as cardiovascular health, obesity, and type 2 diabetes [242], highlighting sleep data‘s significance in understanding overall health.”

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.

  • Table 2 lists highly suggestive associations beyond long sleep and all-cause mortality

    Major

    The text says this was the only highly suggestive association, but Table 2 also grades long sleep and stroke as highly suggestive.

  • Dyslipidaemia is called an increased-risk finding despite a null result

    Major

    The evidence-grading summary describes increased dyslipidaemia risk with long sleep, whereas Table 2 labels that comparison "No association"; Table 1 also reports a relative risk below one with a confidence interval spanning one.

  • Conflicting counts of significant largest sleep-quality studies

    Minor

    The same section says that the studies with the smallest standard error were significant in both five of seven and two of seven sleep-quality meta-analyses.

  • Sleep-quality results are not all significant under both models

    Minor

    The summary says the fixed- and random-effects estimates were significant for the seven sleep-quality meta-analyses, but Table 1 reports confidence intervals spanning one under both models for all-cause mortality.

  • Sleep-duration article count changes from 32 to 33

    Minor

    The summary-effect section attributes the sleep-duration meta-analyses to 32 articles, while the methodological-quality section gives 33 included sleep-duration studies.

5 of 5

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Daly, 1990, Impaired awake cerebral perfusion in sleep apnea [abstract], Am Rev Respir Dis., 141, A376

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gao, C., Guo, J., Gong, T.-T., Lv, J.-L., Li, X.-Y., Liu, F.-H., Zhang, M., Shan, Y.-T., Zhao, Y.-H., & Wu, Q.-J.
Affiliations
  • Sheng Jing Hospital (CN)
  • University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
  • Gong, Ting-Ting
  • Wu, Qi-Jun
Venue
Frontiers in Medicine
Published
2022-01-20
Volume
8
Pages
813943-813943
ISSN
2296-858X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4205430803
Cited by
88
References
117
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 8
FWCI
2.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (82073647)
  • Liaoning Revitalization Talents Program
  • Shengjing Hospital
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
sleep duration, sleep quality, all-cause mortality, long sleep, short sleep duration, stroke, dyslipidemia, coronary heart disease mortality, obesity, diabetes mellitus, gestational diabetes mellitus, health outcomes

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

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