Skip to main content

Table 9 Association between sleep duration and risks/injuries in children aged 0–4 years

From: Systematic review of the relationships between sleep duration and health indicators in the early years (0–4 years)

No of studies Design Quality Assessment No of participants Absolute effect Quality
Risk of bias Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Other
Mean age ranged between 18 months and 4.9 years. Data were collected cross-sectionally only. Sleep duration was assessed by parent report. Risks/injuries were assessed using medical record data, the Injury Behavior Checklist, interviews, or chart reviews of injuries.
3 Cross-sectional studya No serious risk of bias No serious inconsistency No serious indirectness No serious imprecision None 2382 Children with shorter sleep duration sustained a higher number of medically attended injuries (b = 0.1759, p < 0.05) [83].
Usual sleep duration shorter than 8 h was associated with an increased risk of accidental falls (OR = 2.7, 95% CI 1.2–6.1) [84].
The Children’s Sleep Habits Questionnaire (CSHQ) sleep duration score did not significantly differ between the high injury and low injury groups (5.93 ± 1.03 vs. 6.36 ± 0.96, respectively, p = 0.09). Also, the CSHQ sleep duration score did not significantly differ between the high-injury-behavior and the low-injury-behavior groups (5.73 ± 2.10 vs. 4.32 ± 1.92, respectively, p not provided) after Bonferroni correction. The Pearson correlation coefficient between sleep duration and the total Injury Behavior Checklist score was r = 0.32, p = 0.005. To specifically examine the relationship between parent-reported sleep duration and injuries and injury behavior, they divided the group by median split for sleep duration (low sleep < 690 min, high sleep ≥690 min). There were no significant differences in the number of injuries in the past 2 years or in the Injury Behavior Checklist total score [85].
  1. aIncludes 3 cross-sectional studies [83,84,85]. Due to heterogeneity in the measurement of sleep and risks/injuries, a meta-analysis was not possible