Back

Watching the FIFA World Cup and Adult Sleep Quality: A Cross-Sectional Online Survey

Aljamaan, F.; Alanteet, A. A.; Chaiah, Y.; Dasuqi, S. A.; Alarabi, M. A.; Saeed, E.; Al-khatib, S. M.; Darweesh, A. A.; Raina, M.; Saad, K.; Alhasan, K.; BaHammam, A. S.; Temsah, M.-H.

2026-06-08 sports medicine
10.64898/2026.06.07.26355072 medRxiv
Show abstract

Major international sporting events frequently impose exogenous demands that challenge adult circadian rhythms, often leading to the misalignment of sleep-wake cycles and social schedules. This cross-sectional study investigated the impact of the FIFA 2022 World Cup on adult sleep patterns to assess the prevalence and determinants of tournament-associated circadian disruption. Through an online survey, we captured data on sleep duration, timing, and subjective quality from a diverse adult population using Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) score. The results indicate that 81.3% had high problematic sleep according to PSQI scores, while only 9% perceived that their sleep pattern was impacted by watching matches during the tournament. While 83.7% of the participants had low or mild anxiety according to GAD-7 scores, we found that GAD-7 scores correlated significantly with PSQI scores. Married participants had significantly lower PSQI scores (RR 0.856, p = .005), while those who reported that their sleep hours had changed during the tournament had significantly higher PSQI scores (1.180, P-value <0.001). Males reported a significantly high impact of the tournament on their sleep (OR 2.622, P-value <0.001). In conclusion, our data demonstrate a discrepancy between self-perception of sleep quality and self-rated assessment by PSQI scores, as well as the substantial impact of major international sporting events on adult sleep hygiene. The results provide data-driven insights helpful in evaluating potential circadian risks and informing public health strategies for major sporting events such as the FIFA world cup.

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts 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.