Skip to main content
. 2017 Mar 1;24(3):208–226. doi: 10.5551/jat.36194

Table 1. Baseline characteristics of studies used in systematic review.

First Author, Publication Year, Country Study Design Study Population N (age;% female) Sleep Measurement (Subjective/Self-reported) Sleep Measurement (Objective) Non-invasive
CVD measurement
King et al. (33), 2008 United States Cohort 495 (40 ± 4; 59%) Self-Report (PSQI) Actigraphy CAC (Agatston score)-
electron beam CT
Matthews et al. (31), 2011 United States Cross-sectional 195 (60; 50%) Self-Report (PSQI) Actigraphy and PSG CAC (Agatston score)-
electron beam CT
Matthews et al. (32), 2013 United States Cross-sectional 512 (50 ± 3; 100%) Self-Report (PSQI) NR CAC (Agatston score)-
electron beam CT
Lutsey et al (34), 2015 United States Cross-sectional 1465 (68; 54%) NR Actigraphy and PSG CAC (Agatston score)-
electron beam CT
Kim et al, 2015 (17) Korea Cross-sectional 29203 (41.8 ± 7.3; 18.6%) Self-Report (PSQI) NR CAC (Agatston score)-
electron beam CT
Wolff et al. (35), 2008 Germany Cross-sectional 2383 (45 − 81; 51%) Self-Report NR CIMT (mm)-B-mode
ultrasound
Abe et al. (36), 2011 Japan Cross-Sectional 2214 (64 ± 10; 52%) Self-Report questionnaire NR CIMT (mm)-B-mode
ultrasound
Nakazaki et al. (38), 2012 Japan Cross-Sectional 86 (74 ± 5; 71%) Self-Report (PSQI), Actigraphy CIMT (mm)-B-mode
ultrasound
Sands et al. (39), 2012 United States Cohort 617 (37 − 52; 58%) NR Actigraphy CIMT (mm)-B-mode
ultrasound
Nagai et al. (2), 2013 Japan Cross-Sectional 201 (80 ± 6; 75%) Self-Report questionnaire NR CIMT (mm)-B-mode
ultrasound
Ma et al. (37), 2013 United States Cross-sectional 257 (42 ± 9; 26%) Self-Report (PSQI) Actigraphy CIMT (mm)-B-mode
ultrasound
Ramos-Sepulveda et al. (41), 2010 United States Cross-sectional 1605 (65 ± 8; 60%) Self-Report (HRSD) NR CIMT (mm)-B-mode
ultrasound
Schwartz et al. (40) 2102 United States Cross sectional 126 (55; 89%) NR Actigraphy CIMT (mm)-B-mode
ultrasound
Behl et al. (43), 2014 United States Cohort 684 (48 ± 11; 68%) Self-Report (PSQI and ESS) EF-FMD
Cooper et al. (42), 2014 United States Cross-sectional 100 (36 ± 10; 43%) Self-Report (PSQI) and PSG EF-FMD
Calvin et al. (44), 2014 United States Cross-sectional 16 (18 to 40; 37.5%) NR PSG EF-FMD
Takase et al, 2004 (45) Japan Cross-sectional 30 (21.7 ± 1.1; 0%) Self-Report NR EF-FMD
Wehrens et al, 2012 (46) United Kingdom Cross-sectional 25 (25 − 45; 0%) Self-report questionnaire NR EF-FMD
Schmidt et al, 2013 (47) Germany Cross-sectional 75 (20 − 54; 61.3%) NR Actigraphy EF-FMD
Strand et al. (48), 2012 Norway Cross-sectional 4739 (50 ± 13; 45.2%) Self-report questionnaire NR EF-FMD
Suessenbacher et al. (49), 2011 Austria Cross-sectional 48 (43 ± 5; 0%) Self-report questionnaire NR EF-PAT index
Dettoni et al. (50), 2012 Brazil Cross-sectional 13 (31 ± 2; 0%) NR Actigraphy EF (dorsal hand vein
technique)
Sauvet et al. (51), 2009 France Cross-sectional 12 (29 ± 3; 0%) Self-report NR EF (Iontophoresis of Acetylcholine & Na-
nitroprusside)
Bonsen et al. (52), 2015 Netherlands Cross-sectional 259 (42; 55%) Self-report (SWEL) NR EF-Nailfold
capillaroscopy
Weil et al. (53), 2010 United States Cross-sectional 80 (56.6 ± 1.2; 39%) Self-Report NR EF-Endothelin (ET)-1
levels
Weil et al. (54), 2011 United States Cross-sectional 37 (58 ± 1.5; 41%) Self-Report NR EF-Endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs)
functions
Yoshioka et al. (55), 2011 Japan Cross-sectional 4268 (48 ± 7; 20%) Self-Report NR AS-baPWV
Sunbul et al. (56), 2014 Turkey Cross-sectional 42 (30 ± 5; 57%) Self-report questionnaire NR AS-baPWV
Tsai et al. (57), 2014 Taiwan Cross-sectional 3, 508 (age 20 − 87, 40%) Self-Report NR AS-baPWV
Osonoi et al, 2015 (68) Japan Cross-sectional 724 (57.8 ± 8.6; 37.1%) Self-Report (PSQI) NR AS-baPWV
Yamaki et al. 2015, Japan Cross-sectional 101 (70.0 ± 10; 46.5%) Self-Report (PSQI) NR AS-ABI

Abbreviation: NR: Not – reported; SWEL: Sleep Wake Experience List questionnaire