Sleep research article
Habitual lifestyle timing explains circadian timing, but daily lifestyle changes do not, in free-living humans across 2000 days
Authors: Billy C. Smith , Zeel Pansara , Rosanne H. Timmerman , Emmanuel Molefi , Tiago Da Silva Costa , Christopher Thornton , Lucas G. S. França , Rachel E. Stirling , Sarah E. Heaps , Philippa J. Karoly , Mario Leocadio-Miguel , Peter N. Taylor , Karoline Leiberg , Yujiang Wang
One-line summary
A sleep science research article on Habitual lifestyle timing explains circadian timing, but daily lifestyle changes do not, in free-living humans across 2000 days.
Sleep health notes
Sleep health notes will be added by the Sleepatch editorial team.
中文解读
中文解读待补充：本站会优先为失眠研究、睡眠质量改善、昼夜节律等高价值睡眠研究添加中文说明。
Original abstract
Background: Both between- and within-subject variations in circadian timing matter for health. If lifestyle changes could be used to regulate circadian timing, they would offer accessible and scalable routes to chronotherapy, but this link remains unclear under real-life conditions. Here, we explore how lifestyle 'traits' (such as typical wake time) and 'states' (day-to-day deviations from traits, such as waking up later than typical) explain between- and within-subject variation in acrophase (peak time) of the circadian rhythm of heart rate (CRHR). Methods: We collected free-living wearable data (smartwatch, continuous glucose monitor) from healthy volunteers for up to 4 weeks. The CRHR was derived from activity-adjusted heart rate, and acrophase was defined as time-of-day at daily CRHR peak. Sleep, food, and physical activity 'factors' were calculated and split into traits and states. Using a linear mixed-effects model, we tested how traits and states associate with between- and within-subject acrophase variance. Findings: Data from 105 healthy volunteers (66 female, age = 42.5 $\pm$ 15.7 years) spanning ~2000 days (18.8 $\pm$ 8.30 days each) were analysed. Traits were substantially more influential than states, explaining 42.3% versus 0.9% of total acrophase variance. Accordingly, traits explained 86.5% of between-subject variance, whereas states explained only 1.8% of within-subject variance. Sleep, food and physical activity factors contributed both jointly and uniquely, and lifestyle timing mattered most. Interpretation: Between-subject lifestyle traits explained acrophase better than within-subject lifestyle states. This asymmetry, alongside the considerable overlap between factors, supports sustained, holistic, timing-focused lifestyle adjustments as chronotherapy targets, testable through future interventional studies.
Links and sources
This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Sleep disorders, chronic insomnia, sleep apnea, and other conditions must be evaluated and treated by a qualified healthcare professional. If you experience persistent or severe sleep problems, consult a licensed physician or sleep specialist. Research cited refers to peer-reviewed studies; individual results may vary. Sleepatch does not endorse any specific medication, supplement, or therapy.
Want a personalized sleep improvement plan?
Sleepatch can prepare a customized sleep wellness program, insomnia relief guide, and evidence-based sleep coaching based on your needs.
Explore sleep services
Comments