ArticleNpj biological timing and sleep2026
Impact of wear position on dosimeter performance: measurement validity under simulated indoor illumination.
Article in Npj biological timing and sleep, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Impact of wear position on dosimeter performance: a hybrid measurement-simulation approach to quantify in-situ factors.Npj biological timing and sleep · 2026Article
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
The light an individual is exposed to, or personal light exposure (PLE), plays an important role in human health and well-being research. PLE is typically quantified using body-worn light dosimeters (sensors), but their effectiveness as a proxy for measuring at the eye remains insufficiently understood. By combining 3D body scans and lighting simulations, we quantified the discrepancies between chest-worn and eye-level dosimeter measurements under three generalized indoor lighting scenarios. Chest-worn dosimeter performance was found to be highly context-dependent, with the smallest deviations (between -26.2% and 63.8%) observed for devices on the lower chest. Quantifying corneal light exposure, i.e., considering the field of view of the human eye, based on chest-worn dosimeter measurements proved problematic as deviations under overhead lighting exceeded a minimum 25%. To deepen our understanding of the underlying mechanisms, we disaggregated the causes of these discrepancies into three factors: the translational dosimeter displacement, the rotational dosimeter displacement, and body self-occlusion. The results indicate that minimizing the rotational displacement is key to reducing measurement discrepancies and inter-individual variability. To improve the validity of chest-worn dosimetry, an individualized approach is recommended: selecting a chest position where the dosimeter best aligns with the subject's typical view direction during expected activities.
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.