ArticleNeuroscience of consciousness2026
Bridging dream and wake states: a new tool for consciousness research.
Article in Neuroscience of consciousness, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, the Consciousness States Comparison Scale: REM Version (CSCS-REM) was developed as a self-report instrument to assess dream consciousness during REM sleep in comparison with waking consciousness. Existing instruments capture only limited aspects of phenomenology and provide few opportunities for systematic cross-state evaluation. By anchoring waking consciousness as a reference point, the CSCS-REM quantifies relative differences in phenomenological experience and serves as a tool for empirically testing the predictions of the continuity and discontinuity hypotheses in consciousness research. The item pool was derived from a systematic review, expert evaluations, and preliminary studies, with content validity ensured through expert panels. After pilot testing, the 63-item draft was administered online, and data from 432 participants were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis. The final version consisted of 35 items across eight subscales: Metacognitive Awareness, Cognitive Fluency, Memory, Temporal Awareness, Spatial Awareness, Emotional Awareness, Perceptual and Bodily Senses, and Interoceptive and Chemical Senses. This structure accounted for 56.04% of the variance, with Cronbach's α ranging from .736 to .915 and McDonald's ω from .639 to .901. Confirmatory factor analysis in an independent sample (
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.