Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDietch, Jessica R
dc.contributor.authorSethi, Kevin
dc.contributor.authorSlavish, Danica C
dc.contributor.authorTaylor, Daniel J
dc.date.accessioned2019-12-17T18:30:59Z
dc.date.available2019-12-17T18:30:59Z
dc.date.issued2019-11-01
dc.identifier.citationDietch, J. R., Sethi, K., Slavish, D. C., & Taylor, D. J. (2019). Validity of Two Retrospective Questionnaire Versions of the Consensus Sleep Diary: The Whole Week and Split Week Self-Assessment of Sleep Surveys. Sleep Medicine.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1389-9457
dc.identifier.pmid31622954
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.sleep.2019.05.015
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/636392
dc.description.abstractObjective/Background: Prospective, daily sleep diaries are the gold standard for assessing subjective sleep but are not always feasible for cross-sectional or epidemiological studies. The current study examined psychometric properties of two retrospective questionnaire versions of the Consensus Sleep Diary. Participants/Methods: College students (N = 131, mean age = 19.39 +/- 1.65; 73% female) completed seven days of prospective sleep diaries then were randomly assigned to complete either the Self-Assessment of Sleep Survey (SASS), which assessed past week sleep (n = 70), or the SASS-Split (SASS-Y), which assessed weekday/weekend sleep separately (n = 61). Participants also completed psychosocial/sleep questionnaires including the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Sleep parameters derived from SASS, SASS-Y, PSQI, and sleep diaries were assessed via Bland Altman plots, limits of agreement, mean differences, and correlations. Results: SASS-Y demonstrated stronger correlations with prospective sleep diaries and slightly less biased estimates (r = 0.51 to 0.85, alpha = -0.43 to 1.70) compared to SASS (r = 0.29 to 0.84, alpha = -1.63 to 2.33) for terminal wakefulness (TWAK), sleep onset latency (SOL), sleep efficiency (SE), and quality (QUAL). SASS resulted in slightly less bias for total sleep time (TST) and wake after sleep onset (WASO) (alpha = -0.65 and 0.93, respectively) compared to SASS-Y (alpha = 14.90 and 1.05, respectively). SASS and SASS-Y demonstrated greater convergence with sleep diary than PSQI. Conclusions: Results demonstrated good psychometric properties for the SASS and SASS-Y. When prospective sleep diaries are not feasible, the SASS and SASS-Y are acceptable substitutes to retrospectively estimate sleep parameters. Retrospective estimation of sleep parameters separately for weekdays/weekends may offer advantages compared to whole week estimation. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherELSEVIERen_US
dc.rights© 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.en_US
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subjectCollege studentsen_US
dc.subjectSleep diaryen_US
dc.subjectSurveyen_US
dc.subjectValidityen_US
dc.titleValidity of two retrospective questionnaire versions of the Consensus Sleep Diary: the whole week and split week Self-Assessment of Sleep Surveysen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentUniv Arizona, Dept Psycholen_US
dc.identifier.journalSLEEP MEDICINEen_US
dc.description.note12 month embargo; published online: 12 June 2019en_US
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.en_US
dc.eprint.versionFinal accepted manuscripten_US
dc.source.journaltitleSleep medicine


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Dietch,_JR-SLEEP-D-19-00031R2.pdf
Size:
974.6Kb
Format:
PDF
Description:
Final Accepted Manuscript

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record