ArticleNature and science of sleep2025
Relationships Between Self-Reported Sleep Quality, Quantity and Timing on Workdays vs Work-Free Days and Lifestyle Factors in Healthy Adults.
Article in Nature and science of sleep, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exposome factors predict the association between sleep health and depression.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Short-Term Sulfurous Balneotherapy and Self-Reported Sleep Quality: An Exploratory Retrospective Real-World Pre-Post Observational Study at Terme di Saturnia (Italy).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Major depressive disorders in children aged 5-14 years: a Global Burden of Disease analysis from the perspective of exercise psychology.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Sleep Compensation on Work-Free days Is Associated with Better Sleep Quality.Nature and science of sleep · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Sufficient quantity and quality of sleep are crucial for physical and mental health and performance. The ideal duration and time of sleep varies from person to person, with the latter depending on chronotype. However, rather than accommodating these needs, everyday life is often structured around rigid societal times that can result in sleep deficits and poor sleep quality. This survey study in healthy adults investigated the relationships between sleep duration, quality, and timing and how they relate to chronotype, lifestyle, perceived workload and anxiety/depression symptoms. Patients and Methods: Participants (N =315) were recruited from a large German metropolitan region. Sleep quality and quantity were evaluated separately on workdays and work-free days using assessments of tiredness upon waking and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Sleep time, duration, chronotype, sleep loss, and social jetlag were assessed using the Munich ChronoType Questionnaire (MCTQ). Lifestyle variables assessed in this study included exercise and substance use. Self-reported sleep quality, timing and duration were compared between work and work-free days. The relationships between variables were explored using correlation and correlation-based network analyses. Results: Our data suggest that workday sleep duration is a significant determinant of self-reported sleep quality, which in turn is negatively correlated with daytime dysfunction, anxiety/depression, and perception of workload. Moreover, physical activity and not smoking were significantly associated with self-reported sleep quality as well as with depression and anxiety symptoms. Conclusion: In addition to a healthy lifestyle, strategies to advance bedtime and/or adapt working hours to chronotype may improve sleep quality and thus mental health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.