Evidence Hub

Bidirectional relationship between child happiness and sleep quality and the predictive role of prenatal psychosocial support: results from U.S. and China cohort studies

Ying Dai, N. Cui, Xiaopeng Ji, A. Raine, Therese S. Richmond, Jiang-Hong Liu

World Journal of Pediatrics, 2025

1,300 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

The relationship between daily affective states and subjective sleep measures is known to be reciprocal in both adults and children. However, its consistency across infancy to early adolescence and varying sociocultural contexts remain unclear. We investigated the bidirectional relationship between happiness and sleep quality in children from the U.S. and China and examined the predictive role of maternal prenatal psychosocial support. A total of 1300 children aged 11–12 years in the U.S. Healthy Brain and Behavior Study (HBBS) and China Jintan Child Cohort (CJCC) studies were included in the analyses. Happiness and sleep quality from infancy to early adolescence were retrospectively reported by mothers. Prenatal psychosocial factors were recalled by mothers through a structured interview. Random-intercept cross-lagged panel modeling was conducted to analyze the data. Happiness and sleep quality trajectories differed significantly between U.S. adolescents in the HBBS and Chinese adolescents in the CJCC (P < 0.001). In both cohorts, cross-lagged effects showed consistent associations between happiness and subsequent sleep quality across the five time points (coefficients: 0.086–0.154, P < 0.01). The relationship between sleep quality and subsequent happiness was significant from 1–3 to 11 years. The bidirectional relationship was stronger in the Chinese cohort. Maternal prenatal psychosocial support positively predicted children’s happiness (β = 0.072, P < 0.001) and sleep…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,300 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