Back

Making sleep behaviors interpretable: adapting the two-process model of sleep regulation to longitudinal Fitbit sleep and activity behaviors for health insights

Coleman, P.; Annis, J.; Master, H.; Gustavson, D. E.; Han, L.; Brittain, E.; Ruderfer, D. M.

2026-03-03 health informatics
10.64898/2026.03.01.26347356 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundAs sleep data from wearable devices are increasingly available in health research, there are new opportunities to understand sleep regulation behaviors as modifiable risk factors for disease. At such a large scale (tens of thousands of people over millions of day-level observations), prioritizing and interpreting sleep behaviors is challenging while maintaining biological relevance and modifiability. In this work, we aim to address this challenge by proposing a framework to interpret Fitbit data through a well-known neurobiological framing of sleep regulation, the two-process model. MethodsWe use data from the All of Us Research Program, a national biobank with passively collected Fitbit data for 32,292 people across 15,754,893 total days. We map Fitbit behaviors (b) to either circadian (C) or homeostatic (S) processes. Using iterative exploratory factor analysis to obtain weights, the Fitbit Cb and Sb are then weighted at the level of each day to create Cb and Sb scores. FindingsCb and Sb scores were found to align with expected real-world relationships with age, seasonality, shift work, and napping. Cb and Sb scores were interpreted with relation to depression, where it was found that Sb scores are highly associated with likelihood of diagnosis (OR = 1.5, p < 2e-16) while Cb and Sb scores are equally associated with severity (Sb score {beta} = 0.2, Cb score {beta} = 0.21, p < 2e-16). InterpretationCb and Sb scores support longitudinal interpretation (e.g., changes in Sb around treatment), aggregation (e.g., differences in Cb between two groups), and actionable modification (e.g., reduce naps to improve poor Sb). Overall, our behavior scores allow for interpretation of wearables sleep data and can be utilized across many disease contexts to better understand how sleep influences health. FundingThis work was supported by NIH training grant T32GM145734 and NIH R21HL172038.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Sleep Advances
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
31.1%
2
npj Digital Medicine
118 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
12.9%
3
Journal of Biological Rhythms
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.7%
50% of probability mass above
4
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.5%
5
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 33%
3.2%
6
PLOS Digital Health
106 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.2%
7
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 41%
2.6%
8
Frontiers in Neuroscience
256 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
9
Journal of Sleep Research
36 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
10
iScience
1154 papers in training set
Top 13%
2.1%
11
Sleep
58 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
12
Journal of Medical Internet Research
87 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
13
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 13%
1.7%
14
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
37 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
15
JAMIA Open
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.4%
16
Bioinformatics
1204 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.1%
17
eBioMedicine
183 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
18
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
71 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
19
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.1%
20
Biological Psychiatry
137 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
21
Biogerontology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.0%
22
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 60%
1.0%
23
Nature Medicine
125 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
24
Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science
60 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
25
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 33%
0.6%