Inclusion, reporting and analysis of demographic variables in chronobiology and sleep research.
chronobiology
circadian rhythms
demographics
diversity
inclusion
reporting
sleep
Journal
Frontiers in neuroscience
ISSN: 1662-4548
Titre abrégé: Front Neurosci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101478481
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2024
2024
Historique:
received:
21
04
2024
accepted:
07
08
2024
medline:
1
10
2024
pubmed:
1
10
2024
entrez:
1
10
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Many aspects of sleep and circadian physiology are sensitive to participant-level characteristics. While recent research robustly highlights the importance of considering participant-level demographic information, the extent to which this information is consistently collected, and reported in the literature, remains unclear. This article investigates study sample characteristics within the published sleep and chronobiology research over the past 40 years. 6,777 articles were identified and a random sample of 20% was included. The reporting of sample size, age, sex, gender, ethnicity, level of education, socio-economic status, and profession of the study population was scored, and any reported aggregate summary statistics for these variables were recorded. We observed a significant upward trend in the reporting and analysis of demographic variables in sleep and chronobiology research. However, we found that while > 90% of studies reported age or sex, all other variables were reported in < 25% of cases. Reporting quality was highly variable, indicating an opportunity to standardize reporting guidelines for participant-level characteristics to facilitate Meta analyses.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39351394
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2024.1421026
pmc: PMC11439876
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
1421026Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 Tir, White and Spitschan.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.