Evidence Hub

Modifying the Impact of Eveningness Chronotype (“Night-Owls”) in Youth: A Randomized Controlled Trial

A. Harvey, Kerrie Hein, Emily A. Dolsen, Lu Dong, S. Rabe-Hesketh, N. Gumport, Jennifer C. Kanady, J. K. Wyatt et al.

Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 2018

89 participants · 124 citations

Abstract

Objective: To determine whether an intervention to reduce eveningness chronotype improves sleep, circadian, and health (emotional, cognitive, behavioral, social, physical) outcomes. Method: Youth aged 10 to 18 years with an evening chronotype and who were “at risk” in 1 of 5 health domains were randomized to: (a) Transdiagnostic Sleep and Circadian Intervention for Youth (TranS-C; n = 89) or (b) Psychoeducation (PE; n = 87) at a university-based clinic. Treatments were 6 individual, weekly 50-minute sessions during the school year. TranS-C addresses sleep and circadian problems experienced by youth by integrating evidence-based treatments derived from basic research. PE provides education on the interrelationship between sleep, stress, diet, and health. Results: Relative to PE, TranS-C was not associated with greater pre–post change for total sleep time (TST) or bed time (BT) on weeknights but was associated with greater reduction in evening circadian preference (pre-post increase of 3.89 points, 95% CI = 2.94–4.85, for TranS-C, and 2.01 points, 95% CI = 1.05–2.97 for PE, p = 0.006), earlier endogenous circadian phase, less weeknight–weekend discrepancy in TST and wakeup time, less daytime sleepiness, and better self-reported sleep via youth and parent report. In terms of functioning in the five health domains, relative to PE, TranS-C was not associated with greater pre–post change on the primary outcome. However, there were significant interactions favoring TranS-C on the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 89 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