4.6 Review

Quantitative genetic research on sleep: A review of normal sleep, sleep disturbances and associated emotional, behavioural, and health-related difficulties

Journal

SLEEP MEDICINE REVIEWS
Volume 17, Issue 1, Pages 29-40

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.smrv.2012.01.008

Keywords

Environment; Genetic; Heritability; Insomnia; Polysomnography; Sleep; Twins

Funding

  1. Leverhulme Trust Fellowship

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Over the past 50 years, well over 100 twin studies have focussed on understanding factors contributing to variability in normal sleep-wake characteristics and sleep disturbances. Whilst we have gained a great deal from these studies, there is still much to be learnt. Twin studies can be used in multiple ways to answer questions beyond simply estimating heritability. This paper provides a comprehensive review of some of the most important findings from twin studies relating to sleep to date, with a focus on studies investigating genetic and environmental influences contributing to i) objective and subjective measures of normal sleep characteristics (e.g., sleep stage organisation, sleep quality); as well as sleep disturbances and disorders such as dyssomnias (e.g., insomnia, narcolepsy) and parasomnias (e.g., sleepwalking, bruxism); ii) the persistence of sleep problems from childhood to adulthood, and the possibility that the aetiological influences on sleep change with age; iii) the associations between sleep disturbances, emotional, behavioural and health-related problems; and iv) processes of gene-environment correlation and interaction. We highlight avenues for further research, emphasising the need to further consider the aetiology of longitudinal associations between sleep disturbances and psychopathology; the genetic and environmental overlap between sleep and numerous phenotypes; and processes of gene-environment interplay and epigenetics. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. 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