The Circadian Disruption Index: development, validation, and responsiveness to circadian health education
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Study Objectives
To develop and initially validate the Circadian Disruption Index (CDI), a self-report measure of circadian disruption, and obtain preliminary evidence of its responsiveness to circadian health education.
Methods
In Study 1, 244 participants completed a 22-item CDI version and external measures. The sample was randomly divided for exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Internal consistency, external associations, and discrimination of poor sleep quality were examined. In Study 2, 72 postgraduate students completed the CDI before and 1 week after a 16-hour circadian health education program in an uncontrolled pre-post design.
Results
Analyses yielded a 15-item, three-factor structure comprising rhythm stability and light exposure, behavioral habits and diet, and sleep quality and subjective complaints. Total-score internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach’s α = 0.871). Confirmatory factor analysis showed a comparative fit index of 0.902 and a root mean square error of approximation of 0.072, although the Tucker-Lewis index was 0.882. CDI scores correlated with sleep quality, chronotype, corrected midsleep on free days, depression, and anxiety, but not social jetlag. The area under the curve for poor sleep quality was 0.807 (95% confidence interval, 0.753-0.862), with an exploratory cutoff of ≥ 23. In Study 2, CDI scores decreased from 22.26 to 19.88 ( p = 0.002; Cohen’s d z = 0.36).
Conclusions
The CDI demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency, a meaningful multidimensional structure, and responsiveness to short-term changes following circadian health education, supporting its potential utility for assessing circadian disruption and monitoring circadian-related behavioral changes.
Statement of Significance
Existing questionnaires typically assess isolated aspects of circadian functioning, such as chronotype, sleep timing, or sleep quality, leaving a need for a brief measure that captures the broader burden of circadian disruption. This study introduces the Circadian Disruption Index, which integrates rhythm stability and light exposure, behavioral habits and diet, and sleep-related complaints within a single self-report instrument. Initial findings support its multidimensional structure and short-term responsiveness following circadian health education. The index may provide a practical tool for population research and the evaluation of circadian-focused interventions.
