Ru-SATED scale and Sleep Health Index: A systematic review of two leading multidimensional sleep health measures and frameworks across the globe.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Meng Runtang, BaHammam Ahmed S, Dzierzewski Joseph M, Yang Nongnong, Vézina-Im Lydi-Anne, Ying Lau Esther Yuet, Sun Iris Rongwei, Gregory Alice M, Zeitzer Jamie M, Quan Stuart F, Dietch Jessica R, Szklo-Coxe Mariana, Dautovich Natalie D, Stranges Saverio, Tahmasian Masoud, Jean-Louis Girardin, Thompson Michelle G, Jackson Chandra L, Matricciani Lisa, Tang Nicole K Y, Johnson Dayna A, Hale Lauren, Troxel Wendy M, de Batlle Jordi, Manconi Mauro, Tondo Pasquale, Spiegelhalder Kai, Stefani Ambra, Knutson Kristen L, Wickwire Emerson M, Feige Bernd, Bliwise Donald L, Li Junxin, Furihata Ryuji, Poyares Dalva, Khazaie Habibolah, Taiar Redha, Boyer François Constant, Jahrami Haitham, Coelho Julien, Fabbri Marco, Jiménez-Correa Ulises, Zaki Nevin F W, Huang Mengyi, Ma Haiyan, Dong Lu, St Louis Erik K, Stone Katie L, Spruyt Karen, Penzel Thomas, Ferri Raffaele, Buysse Daniel J
Аннотация
Research using the multidimensional sleep health (MDSH) framework has increased globally, often relying on self-report measures. The Ru-SATED scale and Sleep Health Index (SHI) are common self-report measures of MDSH, but comparative data on their measurement properties and contextual characteristics remain limited. Seven electronic databases were searched for measurement properties and uses of the two scales over the past twelve years. This review identified 19 psychometric validation studies concerning two original and 17 cross-cultural, and summarized contextual comparison of MDSH measures and frameworks. Measurement properties of both measures were assessed with the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) guideline, and contextual comparisons were conducted narratively. Both measures exhibited acceptable psychometric properties across diverse cultural settings, with the SHI findings showing greater consistency than those of the Ru-SATED scale. Aggregating the Ru-SATED and SHI frameworks fully covered the sleep characteristics assessed by five instruments grounded in the World Sleep Society initiative, encompassing regularity, satisfaction, alertness, timing, efficiency, duration, and disorder. Notably, the SHI framework incorporates targeted sleep disorder assessment while the Ru-SATED framework specifically excludes such assessment, highlighting the distinct focus and scope of each tool. Instrument selection depends primarily on research purpose, study sample, and intended use. We recommend characterizing both sleep health and sleep disorders to fully capture the complex relationships between sleep and health outcomes.