Cited by 71Sleep and related disordersObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchSleep and Wakefulness Research

Sleep Characteristics of Self-Reported Long Sleepers

Open access
for the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Research Group, Patel, Sanjay R., Blackwell, Terri, Ancoli-Israel, Sonia, Stone, Katie L.·2012·SLEEP

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Self-reported long habitual sleep durations (≥ 9 h per night) consistently predict increased mortality. We compared objective sleep parameters of self-reported long versus normal duration sleepers to determine whether long sleepers truly sleep more or have an underlying sleep abnormality. METHODS: Older men participating in the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men Study (MrOS) were recruited for a comprehensive sleep assessment, which included wrist actigraphy, overnight polysomnography (PSG), and a question about usual nocturnal sleep duration. RESULTS: Of the 3134 participants (mean age 76.4 ± 5.6; 89.9% Caucasian), 1888 (60.2%) reported sleeping 7-8 h (normal sleepers) and 174 (5.6%) reported ≥ 9 h (long sleepers). On actigraphy, long sleepers spent on average 63.0 min more per night in bed (P < 0.001), slept 42.8 min longer (P < 0.001), and spent 6.8 min more per day napping (P = 0.01). Based on PSG, the apnea hypopnea index, periodic limb movement index, arousal index, and sleep stage distribution did not differ. After adjusting for differences in demographics, comorbidities, and medication usage, self-reported long sleepers continued to spend more time in bed and sleep more, based on both actigraphy and PSG. Each additional 30 min in bed or asleep as measured by actigraphy increased the odds of being a self-reported long-sleeper 1.74-fold and 1.33-fold, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: On objective assessment, self-reported long sleepers spend more time in bed and more time asleep than normal duration sleepers. This is not explained by differences in comorbidity or sleep disorders.

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 · 10.5665/sleep.1822

Cites

41 of 41 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

3 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [21]Blackwell T, Redline S, Ancoli-Israel S, Stone K. Comparison of total sleep time from actigraphy and polysomnography in older men: The MrOS Sleep Study. Sleep. 2007;30:A346–A7. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
for the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Research Group, Patel, S. R., Blackwell, T., Ancoli-Israel, S., & Stone, K. L.
Affiliations
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • California Pacific Medical Center (US)
  • Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
Venue
SLEEP
Published
2012-05-01
Volume
35
Issue
5
Pages
641-648
ISSN
  • 0161-8105 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-9109
OpenAlex
W2039540391
Cited by
71
References
44
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
FWCI
11.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • SLEEP (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (UL1TR000128)
  • University of California, San Diego
  • National Institute on Aging (R01AG008415, U01AG018197, U01AG027810, AG018197, AG 08415, AG027810)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL 081385, HL070841, R01HL070847, R01HL070839, HL070842, HL070838, HL070847, K08HL081385, HL070837, R01HL070838, HL071194, R01HL070841, R01HL070848, R01HL071194, R01HL070837, HL070848, R01HL070842, HL070839)
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (U01AR045583, AR045647, AR045654, AR045614, U01AR045580, U01AR045632, U01AR045654, U01AR045614, U01AR045647, AR045580, AR045632, AR045583)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR024140, RR024140)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
Keywords
long sleepers, habitual sleep duration, self-reported sleep duration, napping, sleep disorders, actigraphy, polysomnography, older men, mortality risk
MeSH terms
Aged, Humans, Male, Sleep, Sleep Wake Disorders, Time Factors, Logistic Models, Polysomnography, 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