4.6 Article

Who gets the best sleep? Ethnic and socioeconomic factors related to sleep complaints

Journal

SLEEP MEDICINE
Volume 11, Issue 5, Pages 470-478

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.sleep.2009.10.006

Keywords

Sleep; Population; Sleep quality; Socioeconomic factors; Ethnicity

Funding

  1. University of Pennsylvania Center
  2. [T32HL007713]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Lower socioeconomic status is associated with short or long sleep duration and sleep disturbance (e.g., sleep apnea), which are all related to increased mortality risk. General sleep complaints, however, which may better approximate symptoms as they are experienced, have not been examined in a large population sample. Methods: Sample consisted of n = 159,856 participants from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, representing 36 states/regions across the US. Sleep complaints were measured with a telephone survey item that assessed trouble falling asleep, staying asleep or sleeping too much. Data analysis utilized hierarchical logistic regression and Rao-Schott chi(2). Results: Asian respondents reported the least complaints, and Hispanic/Latino and Black/African-American individuals reported fewer complaints than Whites. Lower income and educational attainment was associated with more sleep complaints. Employment was associated with less sleep complaints and unemployment with more. Married individuals reported the least sleep complaints. Significant interactions with race/ethnicity indicate that the relationship between sleep complaints and marital status, income and employment differs among groups for men, and the relationship with education differs among groups for women. Conclusions: Rates of sleep complaints in African-American, Hispanic/Latino and Asian/Other groups were similar to Whites. Lower socioeconomic status was associated with higher rates of sleep complaint. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available