Evidence Hub

Efficacy of blue-light blocking glasses on actigraphic sleep outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled crossover trials

F. Luna-Rangel, Brenda Gonzalez-Bedolla, Miranda J. Salazar-Ortega, X. Torres-Mancilla, Salim Martinez-Cadena

Frontiers in Neurology, 2025

49 participants · 10 citations

Abstract

Background: Evening exposure to blue light suppresses melatonin, delays circadian phase, and prolongs sleep onset latency, impairing sleep quality. Blue-light blocking glasses (BBGs) are proposed as a non-pharmacological strategy to mitigate these effects, but trial evidence remains inconsistent due to small samples and heterogeneous protocols.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of BBGs in improving objective sleep outcomes sleep onset latency (SOL), total sleep time (TST), sleep efficiency (SE), and wake after sleep onset (WASO) compared to clear lenses or no intervention in adults.

Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 2010 to 2024. Eligible studies enrolled adults using BBGs before bedtime and reported actigraphy-derived outcomes. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using the generic inverse variance method. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251034611).

Results: Three double-blind crossover RCTs (n = 49) were included. BBGs showed a non-significant reduction in SOL (MD = -4.86 min; 95% CI: -20.23 to 10.52; p = 0.54) and a non-significant increase in TST (MD = 8.75 min; 95% CI: -35.31 to 52.82; p = 0.70). No significant effects were found for SE (MD = -0.61; 95% CI: -7.58 to 6.35; p = 0.86) or WASO (MD = -1.47; 95% CI: -14.94 to 11.99; p = 0.83). Heterogeneity was low (I 2 = 0%).

Conclusion: BBGs may provide small improvements in sleep, but current evidence from RCTs does…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 49 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