Study record · narrative review · 2024

State of the science and recommendations for using wearable technology in sleep and circadian research

de Zambotti M, Goldstein C, Cook J, Menghini L, Altini M, Cheng P, et al.

Sleep, 47(4), zsad325 · 2024

Why this study matters to CircaTest

The most authoritative recent (2024) state-of-the-science review on wearable sleep technology, commissioned by the Sleep Research Society. Especially important for CircaTest because it explicitly flags that wearable performance varies by skin color and BMI, and that these biases risk amplifying existing healthcare disparities. The methodology page should reference this for the equity discussion.

Abstract

Wearable sleep-tracking technology is of growing use in the sleep and circadian fields, including for applications across other disciplines, inclusive of a variety of disease states.…

Read the full abstract on the source →

Source: PUBMED · Excerpt for fair-use commentary; full abstract via the source link

Population

Age

n/a

Reference standard

psg

Sleep Research Society state-of-the-science review covering wearable sleep technology across research and clinical contexts.

Cite this study

de Zambotti M, Goldstein C, Cook J, Menghini L, Altini M, Cheng P, et al. (2024). State of the science and recommendations for using wearable technology in sleep and circadian research. Sleep, 47(4), zsad325. https://doi.org/10.1093/sleep/zsad325

AI-assembled record · errors are possible

This page was built and is maintained by AI working from the published abstract and PubMed metadata for the cited study. CircaTest does not have access to the full text of every paper in its corpus. Categories of error that have happened on this site and could happen again include:

Per-device metric values inferred when the abstract reports only an aggregate range
Stage-specific accuracy figures pulled from secondary sources rather than the primary paper
Sample size or population characteristics missing from the abstract
Editorial framing in the curatorial note that overstates the study's actual scope
Year typos and author-name transliteration errors

Where a metric value reads see source, the published abstract did not contain that value and CircaTest deliberately left it null rather than guess. For any decision that depends on the underlying numbers, please consult the linked PubMed, PMC, or DOI source directly. Corrections are welcome via the about page.

Source links

Added to the CircaTest meta-analysis on 2026-04-06. How CircaTest evaluates studies →