Evidence Hub

Sleep, internalizing symptoms, and health-related quality of life in children with neurodevelopmental disorders: a cross-sectional analysis of cohort data from three research programs in Canada

P. Mcphee, S. Georgiades, Andrea Andrade, P. Corkum, A. Vaccarino, Heena Cheema, Rachel Chepesiuk, A. Iaboni et al.

Frontiers in sleep, 2023

1,438 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

Objective The objectives of this study were to determine rates of sleep disturbances in children with neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) within and across disorders and compared to typically developing (TD) children and to describe differences above and below the clinical cut-off for sleep disturbances. In addition, we explored the associations between demographic variables, severity of disorder, sleep disturbances, internalizing symptoms, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in children with NDDs. Method We conducted cross-sectional data analyses of an existing database with community-dwelling children with NDDs (n = 1438) and TD children (n = 140) aged 4–12 years. Parent-reported measures on sleep disturbances using the Children's Sleep Habits Questionnaire (CSHQ), internalizing symptoms using the Revised Children's Anxiety and Depression Scale, and HRQOL using the KINDL-R were assessed. Hierarchical linear regression examined the associations between demographic variables, severity of disorder, sleep disturbances, internalizing symptoms, and HRQOL in children with NDDs. Results Children with NDDs (8.5 ± 2.1 years, 69.9% M) had significantly greater total sleep disturbance index (TSDI) than TD children [(8.6 ± 2.3 years, 60.0% M) (mean difference = 6.88 [95% CI 5.37, 8.40]; p < 0.001) (n = 838 NDDs (58.3%); n = 120 TD (86.7%)]. Children with severe NDDs reported significantly greater TSDI above the clinical cut-off (i.e., ≥41; CSHQ) than those with less severe NDDs…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 1,438 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free