Back

Self-Directed Home-Based Dim-Light Melatonin Onset Collection: The Circadia Pilot Study

Bormes, G.; Love, J.; Oluwaseun, A.; Cherry, J.; Kunorozva, L.; Qadri, S.; Rahman, S.; Westover, B.; Winkelman, J. W.; Lane, J.

2023-05-30 genetic and genomic medicine
10.1101/2023.05.26.23290467 medRxiv
Show abstract

Study ObjectivesTo test the feasibility of a novel at-home salivary Dim Light Melatonin Onset (DLMO) assessment protocol to measure the endogenous circadian phase of 10 individuals (1 Advanced Sleep-Wake Phase Disorder patient (ASWPD), 4 Delayed Sleep-Wake Phase Disorder patients (DSWPD), and 5 controls). MethodsThe study involved 10 participants (sex at birth: females = 9; male= 1), who ranged between 27 to 63 years old, with an average age of 38 years old. Our study population consisted of 7 individuals who identified as white and 3 who identified as Asian. Our participants were diverse in gender identity (woman = 7, male = 1, transgender = 1, nonbinary = 1, none = 1).The study tracked the sleep and activity patterns of 10 individuals over a 5-6 week period using self-reported online sleep diaries and objective actigraphy data. Participants completed two self-directed DLMO assessments, approximately one week apart, adhering to objective compliance measures. Participants completed the study entirely remotely: they completed all sleep diaries and other evaluations online and were mailed a kit with all materials needed to perform the actigraphy and at-home sample collections. ResultsSalivary DLMO times were calculated for 8/10 participants using the Hockeystick method. DLMO times were on average 3 hours and 18 minutes earlier than self-reported sleep onset times (DSPD: 12:04 AM, controls: 9:55 PM.) Among the 6 participants for whom we calculated two separate DLMO times, DLMOs 1 and 2 were 96% correlated (p<0.0005.) ConclusionsOur results indicate that self-directed, at-home DLMO assessments are feasible and accurate. The current protocol may serve as a framework to reliably assess circadian phase in both clinical and general populations.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.