Evidence Hub

0005 Validation and Comparison of Mathematical Models to Predict Circadian Phase Among Preschoolers

Nana Jiao, Uzair Alam, O. Walch, Hafza R Dadabhoy, I. Raza, Maci Kelley, V. Pham, P. Cheng et al.

SLEEPJ, 2026

Abstract

Having a later circadian phase is linked to risks for childhood obesity, which often persists into adulthood and is strongly related to metabolic disease risk-associated conditions, now increasingly observed in early childhood. However, accurately assessing circadian phase in young children is challenging. Mathematical models within applied mathematics provide a promising approach. This study aimed to validate and compare two models, the physics-based Forger and physiologically informed Hannay model, to advance circadian phase predictions using activity inputs in preschoolers.

As part of an ongoing randomized controlled trial, 69 parents of 4-year-old preschoolers (55.6% male, Latino 37.5%) completed 7-day wrist-worn actigraphy before a lab visit, during which dim light melatonin onset (DLMO) was assessed. Salivary melatonin was sampled hourly under dim-light conditions (< 5 lx). Actigraphy data were used to predict circadian phase. Model simulations were conducted using Runge-Kutta 45 numerical integration written in Python. Lin’s Concordance Correlation Coefficient (LinCCC) was used to assess agreement between model-predicted DLMO and salivary DLMO. The Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and percentage of participants with a predicted DLMO within 1hr of measured DLMO were calculated. The Bland-Altman method was used to evaluate bias between two methods and to estimate an agreement interval within which 95% of the differences fall. A sensitivity test was also conducted, excluding…

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.

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