Epidemiology of sleep disorders during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic scoping review protocol

  1. Samia Tasnim
  2. Mariya Rahman
  3. Priyanka Pawar
  4. Liye Zou
  5. Abida Sultana
  6. E. Lisako J. McKyer
  7. Ping Ma
  8. Md Mahbub Hossain

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Background: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is impacting human health globally. In addition to physical health problems, a growing burden of mental health problems has become a global concern amid this pandemic. Sleep disorders are major mental health problems associated with increased psychosocial stressors; however, no research synthesis is available on the epidemiology of sleep disorders. In this systematic scoping review, we aim to assess the current evidence on the epidemiological burden, associated factors, and interventions from the existing literature on sleep disorders. Methods: We will search seven major health databases and additional sources to identify, evaluate, and synthesize empirical studies on the prevalence and correlates of sleep disorders and available interventions addressing the same. We will use the Joanna Briggs Institute Methodology for Scoping Review and report the findings using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. Conclusion: This review will identify the epidemiological burden of and interventions for sleep disorders. The findings of this review will be widely communicated with the research and professional community to facilitate future research and practice.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.05.17.20104794: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Search strategy: We will search MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, Academic Search Ultimate, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Science, and APA PsycInfo databases using the keywords with Boolean operators as mentioned in Table 1.
    MEDLINE
    suggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)
    Embase
    suggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)
    PubMed
    suggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)
    PsycInfo
    suggested: (PsycINFO, RRID:SCR_014799)
    Moreover, we will search the reference lists and citing articles in Google Scholar to identify additional articles that may meet our criteria.
    Google Scholar
    suggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.05.17.20104794v1 on medRxiv