Evidence Hub

Hawthorne effect with transient behavioral and biochemical changes in a randomized controlled sleep extension trial of chronically short-sleeping obese adults: implications for the design and interpretation of clinical studies

Cizza G, Piaggi P, Rother KI, Csako G, Sleep Extension Study Group

PloS one, 2014

125 participants · 44 citations

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effects of study participation per se at the beginning of a sleep extension trial between screening, randomization, and the run-in visit.

Design: Subjects were screened, returned for randomization (Comparison vs. Intervention) after 81 days (median), and attended run-in visit 121 days later.

Setting: Outpatient.

Patients: Obese (N = 125; M/F, 30/95; Blacks/Whites/Other, N = 73/44/8), mean weight 107.6±19.7 kg, <6.5 h sleep/night.

Intervention: Non-pharmacological sleep extension.

Measurements: Sleep duration (diaries and actigraphy watch), sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index), daily sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale), fasting glucose, insulin and lipids.

Results: Prior to any intervention, marked improvements occurred between screening and randomization. Sleep duration increased (diaries: 357.4 ±51.2 vs. 388.1±48.6 min/night; mean±SD; P<0.001 screening vs. randomization; actigraphy: 344.3 ±41.9 vs. 358.6±48.2 min/night; P<0.001) sleep quality improved (9.1±3.2 vs. 8.2±3.0 PSQI score; P<0.001), sleepiness tended to improve (8.9±4.6 vs. 8.3±4.5 ESS score; P = 0.06), insulin resistance decreased (0.327±0.038 vs. 0.351±0.045; Quicki index; P<0.001), and lipids improved, except for HDL-C. Abnormal fasting glucose (25% vs. 11%; P = 0.007), and metabolic syndrome (42% vs. 29%; P = 0.007) both decreased. In absence of intervention, the earlier metabolic improvements disappeared at the run-in visit.

Limitations: Relatively small sample size.…

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: 125 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