Background
Methods
Protocol and registration
Eligibility criteria
Information sources and search strategy
Study selection
Data collection
Risk of bias in individual studies
Data analysis
Results
Included studies
Study characteristics
Study | Temporal pattern | Population | Age- mean (SD), range, % female | Outcome | Tool | Assessment- length, total, frequency |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tonetti 2013 [27] | Daylight savings time | University students, Italy (n = 14) | 26.9 (3.3), 21–30, 0% | Sleep | Accelerometer: Actiwatch AW-64 | 7 days × 2, pre/post DST transition |
BaHammam 2003 [28] | Ramadan | Fasting Muslim medical students, Saudi Arabia (n = 56) | 22.6 (1.3), range NR, 45% | Sleep | Questionnairea | 5 weekdays ×4, pre/during Ramadan |
BaHammam 2005 [29] | Ramadan | Healthy adults, Saudi Arabia (SF n = 41 & NSF n = 30) | SF: 32.6 (1.5), range NR, 39%. NSF: 29.3 (1.6), range NR, 44% | Sleep | Questionnairea | 5 weekdays × 3, pre/during Ramadan |
BaHammam 2013 [30] | Ramadan | Male hospital staff, Saudi Arabia (n = 8) | 36.3 (4.5), range NR, 0% | Sleep | Accelerometer: SenseWear Pro Armband | 5 weekdays ×3, pre/during Ramadan |
Waterhouse 2009 [31] | Ramadan | Healthy adults, Libya (n = 20) | Mean NR, range NR, 0% | Sleep | Questionnairea | 1-night × 4, pre/during/post Ramadan |
Buchowski 2009 [32] | Season (Wi, Su) | Healthy females, USA (n = 57) | 36.5 (9.2), 20–54, 100% | SB, LPA, MVPA | Accelerometer: Tritrac-R3D | 7 days × 3, consecutive seasons |
Pechova 2019 [26] | Season (Sp, Au) | Healthy adults, Czech Republic, Slovakia & Poland (n = 50) | 61.2 (2.4), 55–65, % NR | SB, LPA, MPA, VPA, | Accelerometer: ActiGraph GT1M | 8 days ×2, 6-month follow-up |
Lloyd 2013 [33] | Season (Wi, Sp, Su, Au) | Mexican American females, USA (n = 36) | 33.9 (9.5), 20–63, 100% | MPA, VPA | Questionnaire: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey | Prior 3 months ×5, quarterly |
O’Connell 2014 [34] | Season (Wi, Sp, Su, Au) | Healthy adults, England (n = 46) | F: 42.7 (14.8), range NR. M: 39.5 (14.4), range NR, 72% | SB, LPA, MVPA, sleep | Sleep diarya, accelerometer: ActiGraph GT1M | 7 days × 4, consecutive seasons |
Lehnkering 2007 [35] | Season (Sp, Au) | Medical students, Germany (n = 34) | Mean NR, 19–31, 56% | Sleep | Accelerometer: Actiwatch, Sleep diarya | 15 days × 2, 6-month follow-up |
Shochat 2019 [36] | Season (Sp, Au) | University students, England (n = 19) | 18.9 (0.8), range NR, % NR | Sleep | Sleep diary: Karolinska Sleep Diary | 21 days × 2, 6-month follow-up |
Adamsson 2018 [37] | Season (Wi, Sp, Su, Au) | Daytime office workers, Sweden (n = 30) | F: 42.6 (10.0), 24–61, M: 45.2 (14.7), 21–64, 67% | Sleep | Sleep diarya | 3 weekdays × 12, monthly |
Garde 2014 [38] | Season (Wi, Sp, Su, Au) | Hospital staff, Sweden (n = 22) & research staff, Denmark (n = 16) | Sweden: 48.8 (9.2), 33–62, 73%. Denmark: 42.1 (9.8), 25–62, 63% | Sleep | Sleep diary: Karolinska Sleep Diary, accelerometer: Actiwatch AW4 | 1 workday night ×12, monthly |
Friborg 2012 [39] | Season (Wi, Su) | University students, Ghana (n = 200) & Norway (n = 200) | Ghana- F: 25.4 (7.5), 19–49, M: 25.3 (6.1), 19–51, 48%. Norway- F: 22.7 (4.8), 19–50, M: 22.7 (5.5), 18–54, 73% | Sleep | Sleep diarya | 7 days × 2, 6-month follow-up |
Ludy 2018 [40] | Season (Wi, Su) | University students, USA (n = 60) | 18.1 (0.3), range NR, 82% | Sleep | Questionnaire: Youth Risk Behaviour Survey | 7 days × 2, 4-month follow-up |
Suzuki 2019 [41] | Season (Wi, Su, Sp, Au) | Community residents, Japan (n = 960) | YA: mean NR, 19–31, % NR. MA: mean NR, 40–61, % NR | Sleep | Questionnairea | 14 nights × 4, consecutive seasons |
Cooper 2016 [25] | Vacation | Healthy adults, USA (n = 122) | 32.2 (13), range NR, 65% | SB, LPA, MPA, VPA | Questionnaire: International Physical Activity Questionnaire | 7 days × 3, pre/during/post-vacation |
Participants
Primary outcomes
Critical appraisal
Adamsson 2018 [37] | BaHammam 2003 [28] | BaHammam 2005 [29] | BaHammam 2013 [30] | Buchowski 2009 [32] | Cooper 2016 [25] | Friborg 2012 [39] | Garde 2014 [38] | Lehnkering 2007 [35] | Lloyd 2013 [33] | Ludy 2018 [40] | O’Connell 2014 [34] | Pechova 2019 [26] | Shochat 2019 [36] | Suzuki 2019 [41] | Tonetti 2013 [27] | Waterhouse 2009 [31] | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Question | Responses | ||||||||||||||||
3. Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way? | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
4. Were confounding factors identified? | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
5. Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated? | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | U |
7. Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way? | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | U | ✓ | U |
8. Was the follow-up time reported and sufficient to be long enough for outcomes to occur? | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ |
9. Was follow up complete, and if not, were the reasons to loss to follow up described and explored? | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✗ | ✓ | U |
10. Were strategies to address incomplete follow up utilized? | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | U | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | U |
11. Was appropriate statistical analysis used? | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |