Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Sources of Variability in Epidemiological Studies of Sleep Using Repeated Nights of In-Home Polysomnography: SWAN Sleep Study

2012; American Academy of Sleep Medicine; Volume: 08; Issue: 01 Linguagem: Inglês

10.5664/jcsm.1670

1550-9397

Huiyong Zheng, MaryFran Sowers, Daniel J. Buysse, Flavia B. Consens, Howard M. Kravitz, Karen A. Matthews, Jane F. Owens, Ellen B. Gold, Martica H. Hall,

Sleep and Wakefulness Research

Free AccessSleep DurationSources of Variability in Epidemiological Studies of Sleep Using Repeated Nights of In-Home Polysomnography: SWAN Sleep Study Huiyong Zheng, Ph.D., MaryFran Sowers, Ph.D., Daniel J. Buysse, M.D., Flavia Consens, M.D., Howard M. Kravitz, D.O., M.P.H., Karen A. Matthews, Ph.D., Jane F. Owens, Dr.P.H., Ellen B. Gold, Ph.D., Martica Hall, Ph.D. Huiyong Zheng, Ph.D. Address correspondence to: Huiyong Zheng, Ph.D., Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, 1415 Washington Heights, Room 1854, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109(734) 615-9573(734) 764-6250 E-mail Address: [email protected] Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI , MaryFran Sowers, Ph.D. Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI , Daniel J. Buysse, M.D. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA , Flavia Consens, M.D. Department of Neurology and Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA , Howard M. Kravitz, D.O., M.P.H. Departments of Psychiatry and Preventive Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL , Karen A. Matthews, Ph.D. Departments of Epidemiology and Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA , Jane F. Owens, Dr.P.H. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA , Ellen B. Gold, Ph.D. Division of Epidemiology, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of California, Davis, CA , Martica Hall, Ph.D. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA Published Online:February 15, 2012https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.1670Cited by:29SectionsAbstractEpubPDF ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations AboutABSTRACTStudy Objective:To quantify sources of night-to-night variability.Methods:This project was conducted in 285 middle-aged African American, Caucasian, and Chinese women from the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation (SWAN) Sleep Study living in Chicago, the Detroit area, Oakland, and Pittsburgh. The study used 3 repeated nights of in-home polysomnography (PSG) measures. Night 1 data included assessment of sleep staging, sleep apnea, and periodic limb movements, while Nights 2 and 3 focused on sleep staging.Results:Mean total sleep time (TST) increased substantially from 365 minutes on Night 1 to 391 minutes and 380 minutes, respectively, on Nights 2 and 3. Mean percent sleep efficiency (SE%) for the 3 nights were 83%, 85%, and 85%, respectively. Night 1 sleep values were significantly different than Nights 2 and 3 measures except for S2 (%), S1 (min), and Delta (S3+4)%. Nights 2 and 3 differences in variability were negligible. Obesity, past smoking, and financial strain measures were associated with greater Night 1 vs. Night 2 or Night 3 differences. We concluded that there was significant Night 1 vs. Nights 2 and 3 variability and, though relatively modest, it was sufficient to bias estimates of association. Additionally, personal characteristics including smoking, obesity, and financial strain increased night-to-night variability.Conclusions:This reports adds new information about between and within person sources of variation with in-home PSG and identifies elements that are essential in the design and planning of future sleep studies of multi-ethnic groups in social and physiological transition states such as the menopause.Citation:Zheng H; Sowers MF; Buysse DJ; Consens F; Kravitz HM; Matthews KA; Owens JF; Gold EB; Hall M. Sources of variability in epidemiological studies of sleep using repeated nights of in-home polysomnography: SWAN Sleep Study. J Clin Sleep Med 2012;8(1):87-96.INTRODUCTIONPolysomnography (PSG) is widely used in clinical and epidemiological research settings to provide objective sleep measures.1–6 PSG can be conducted using in-home settings or sleep laboratories considering the advantages afforded by variability in the closeness of monitoring, the ability to correct technical problems in a timely manner, and control temperature, noise and other environmental factors to minimize systematic bias. Use of PSG in the home or laboratory setting has substantial costs for data acquisition and the time required for data processing while potentially imposing physical and psychological burdens on the participant.7 Given these considerations, it is important to ascertain how much and what kind of data must be collected, determine if more than a single night's data collection is required to describe sleep behaviors; and, identify personal characteristics associated with substantially increased within-person variation in sleep behaviors.Considering the number of data collection nights that are needed to provide unbiased estimates of sleep characteristics is often made more complex because of the impact of the "first night" effect (FNE), generated from changes in the sleep environment, the presence of sleep monitoring instrumentation, and any potential psychological uneasiness of being observed.8–12 The FNE has been associated with less total sleep time (TST), lower sleep efficiency (SE), more intermittent waking time, and longer REM latency (RL)9 in clinical or in-home studies.13,14BRIEF SUMMARYCurrent Knowledge/Study Rationale: Use of repeated polysomnography (PSG) in the home or laboratory to describe sleep behavior has substantial costs in money and time for data acquisition and data processing while potentially imposing physical and psychological burdens on the participant. In order to reduce the costs and relieve the burdens for designing and planning of future sleep studies, this report uses 3 nights' in-home PSG data from SWAN Sleep Study to evaluate night-to-night variation, information redundancy, and identify personal characteristics associated with substantially increased within-person variation in sleep behaviors.Study Impact: Through the evaluation of sources of night-to-night variation with in-home PSG, this reported identifies elements that are essential in the design and planning of future sleep studies of multi-ethnic groups in social and physiological transition states such as the menopause. Two nights of in-home PSG assessment with an appropriate sample size can provide robust parameter estimates of sleep duration, continuity, and architecture in community samples; the identified personal characteristics associated with greater variability between first and second night measures includes smoking, obesity, and financial strain.The SWAN Sleep Study evaluated sleep characteristics in 368 African American, Caucasian, and Chinese women across the menopause transition using 3 nights of in-home PSG. Sleep stage scoring and electrocardiograms were used on all study nights while sleep disordered breathing and leg movements (Night 1) as well as skin temperature and snoring sensors (Night 2 only) were used on selected nights. We evaluated: (1) the magnitude of night-to-night variability on PSG-processed sleep measures; (2) the loss of information if PSG studies of women were restricted to 1, 2, or 3 nights; and (3) sources of within-person variation in the 3 nights of study.METHODSThe SWAN Sleep Study is a comprehensive study of sleep nested within the ongoing, larger parent longitudinal cohort SWAN study and conducted at 4 of the 7 clinical sites. This 2003 to 2005 time frame overlapped the 5th – 7th annual core SWAN protocol examinations.SWAN Study Design and ParticipantsSWAN, a community-based, multisite cohort study of the menopausal transition, enrolled 3,302 women, aged 42-52 years, at its 1996 baseline.15 Each clinical site recruited Caucasian women. Also recruited were African American women in Boston, Chicago, Detroit area, and Pittsburgh, Chinese women in Oakland, Japanese women in Los Angeles, and Hispanic women in Newark. Women were excluded from cohort enrollment if they were pregnant, using exogenous hormones in the 3 months prior to the baseline interview, had not had menstrual bleeding in the 3 months prior to the baseline interview, or had a hysterectomy. Institutional review boards approved the study, and women gave signed, written informed consent to participate.SWAN Sleep Study Design and ParticipantsThe SWAN Sleep Study was a nested cross-sectional study of sleep patterns at mid-life.16,17 A cohort of 370 was enrolled, including 328 pre- and peri-menopausal and 42 postmenopausal African American, Caucasian, and Chinese women, aged 48 to 59 years, from the Chicago, Detroit area, Oakland CA, and Pittsburgh SWAN sites. Women with surgical menopause (< 1%) or using hormone therapy (approximately 23% of the cohort by SWAN follow-up visit 5) were excluded. Exclusion criteria also included factors that could affect sleep including ongoing treatment for cancer or rotating or night shift employment (exclusion rates for these measures were between 1% and 3%). Two of the 370 women had no PSG study and were excluded from this analysis.Sleep Study ProtocolThe sleep protocol was initiated within 7 days of the beginning of the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle in women who were still menstruating. Three consecutive nights of in-home PSG studies used the Vitaport 3 (VP3) PSG monitor (Temec, Netherlands). Night 1 included a sleep disorders screening PSG montage with 2 channels of electroencephalography (EEG) (C4/A1, C3/A2), bilateral electro-oculograms (EOG), bipolar submental electromyograms (EMG), and one channel of electrocardiogram (EKG). Sleep disordered breathing was assessed using nasal pressure and oral-nasal thermistors to measure airflow; impedance plethysmography characterized chest and abdominal wall movements; and fingertip oximetry (Nonin X-pod model 3012) to measure oxyhemoglobin saturation. Bilateral anterior tibialis EMG was used to assess periodic leg movements (PLM), and characteristics of restless legs were quantified by self-reported questionnaire.18 On Nights 2 and 3, a sleep staging montage was deployed, which included the EEG, EOG, submental EMG, and EKG channels but not nasal pressure, airflow, oximetry, respiratory effort, or anterior tibialis measurements. Because studies were conducted overnight in participants' homes, technicians were not present to replace sensors and electrodes during the studies. PSG study failure was defined as follows: for the sleep screening night the PSG had to include ≥ 4 h of scorable data for sleep staging and oximetry, concurrent with scorable data for ≥ 1 of the following: nasal pressure cannula, thermistor, or inductance plethysmography belt. For sleep staging PSGs, scorable data were required for 100% of the recording time for at least one EEG channel, one EOG channel, and the EMG channel. In the SWAN Sleep Study, the overall PSG failure rate was 6.25% (i.e., 1−1035368×3, the denominator 368 × 3 = 1104 is the total number of expected PSG studies for 368 women who participated in PSG studies and the numerator 1035 is the total number of scorable nights including repeat studies conducted when initial studies were inadequate), which compares favorably with that of other in-home PSG studies, such as the 5% to 9% failure rate reported in the Sleep Heart Health Study.19Sleep was visually scored in 20-sec epochs on each night using standardized scoring criteria.16,20 This study was initiated prior to the recent publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine's scoring criteria. Rechtschaffen and Kales criteria recommend either 20- or 30-sec scoring epochs. The University of Pittsburgh laboratory used 20-sec epochs for 2 reasons. First, 20-sec epochs provide slightly finer-grained measures of sleep and wakefulness with less potential misclassification (since each epoch can receive only one stage score, up to 50% of an epoch may be another stage). Second, algorithms for quantitative EEG measurement with power spectral analysis used 4-sec epochs, and alignment with visually scored sleep data was more precise if scoring epochs were multiples of 4 seconds. Measures of sleep duration included time in bed and time spent asleep (TST). Time in bed was calculated as time from reported lights out (with confirmation of PSG signals consistent with reduced activity) to time of reported awakening from sleep (again with confirmation of PSG signals consistent with increased activity). TST was calculated as total minutes scored as stages 1 to 4 of NREM sleep and REM sleep. Sleep continuity was quantified by measures of sleep latency (SL [time in minutes from beginning of the recording period to the first consecutive 10 min of stage 2 or stage 3-4 sleep interrupted by ≤ 2 min of stage 1 or wakefulness]); wakefulness after sleep onset (WASO [total minutes of wakefulness between sleep onset and verified awakening in the morning]), and sleep efficiency (SE [time spent asleep/time in bed × 100]). Measures of sleep architecture included minutes and percent of time spent asleep spent in NREM stages 1, 2, and 3 + 4, and REM sleep.Sociodemographic InformationRace/ethnicity was determined by self-designation as African American, Caucasian, or Chinese. Other sociodemographic variables included age (continuous variable), marital status (single/never married, married or living as married, separated/widowed/divorced), and educational attainment (high school graduate or less, some college, college graduate, graduate studies). A 3-level response to a question about difficulty in paying for basics (very, somewhat, or not very difficult) including food, shelter, and health care was used as an indicator of financial strain. Study site designation was included in statistical models.Physical and Mental Health VariablesSelf-perceived overall health was coded as excellent, very good/good, fair/poor. Body mass index (BMI) was computed as measured weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared. Depressive symptoms were assessed with the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D, depressed vs. not depressed) Scale administered at the closest annual core SWAN visit preceding the Sleep Study.Menopause transition status was designated as using annual Core SWAN data into one of the following 4 categories: premenopausal (no change in menstrual bleeding regularity); early perimenopausal (menses in the preceding 3 months with an increase in bleeding irregularity); late perimenopausal (menses in the previous 12 months, but not the previous 3 months; and postmenopausal (≥ 12 months of amenorrhea).21Daily medication use (prescription and over-the-counter), recorded at Sleep Study protocol inception and from daily diaries was coded according to the World Health Organization Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification.22 Physical activity was measured at the annual core SWAN visits assessing 3 domains (sports, leisure, and household activities) and was treated as a continuous variable. Responses about smoking frequency, alcohol consumption, and caffeine consumption were determined from the daily sleep diaries. Smoking behavior was classified as current, past, and never. Current smokers were those who reported smoking ≥ 7 cigarettes in the 2-week period initiated by the sleep protocol.Data AnalysisOf the 370 participants enrolled in the SWAN Sleep Study, 368 had PSG data: 364 completed Night 1 (sleep screening PSG), 342 completed Night 2 (sleep staging PSG), and 329 completed Night 3 (sleep staging PSG). These numbers include individuals who repeated PSGs when the initial study failed, yielding an overall PSG success rate of 93.8% (364 + 342 + 329 = 1035 successful studies, versus 368 × 3 = 1104 expected PSG studies; 1035 / 1104 = 0.938). Aggregating these data, 365 women had at least one sleep-staging PSG (i.e., Night 2 or Night 3); 361 had the sleep-screening PSG (Night 1) plus at least one sleep-staging PSG; 306 had both sleep-staging PSGs; and 303 had all 3 nights (including repeat studies for initial study failures). All 3 nights were completed in the protocol-planned order by 285 women (sleep screening PSG, sleep staging PSG 1, sleep staging PSG 2), which formed the dataset for these analyses. Data from 83 women who had at least one PSG were excluded due to non-scorable (n = 65) night(s) or failing to follow the temporal sequence (n = 18). The latter case pertained, for instance, to women whose initial screening study failed, and was repeated on another night.Univariate statistics were computed for continuous variables and frequencies were determined for categorical variables. Variables with highly skewed distributions were transformed or categorized. Statistical significance was based on p-values from 2-sided tests at a value of p < 0.05.A one-way repeated measures analysis of variance was used to evaluate the temporal effect of study nights on PSG measures. Orthogonal contrasts were used to compare measures across these 3 nights. The difference between the average of Nights 2 and 3 versus Night 1 was also compared. To evaluate whether having 2 subsequent nights added more information than a single night, a multivariate regression model with random design matrix was used.23 where N is the total number of subjects. Yi was the collection of measurements to be removed (e.g., Night 3) and Xi was the collection of measurements to be retained (e.g., Night 1 and Night 2). The loss-of-information, defined by normalized mean squared error (MSE) of the residuals, was used to quantify the effect of removing some nights of PSG measurements.Within-person variation for individual sleep measures was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) with 95% confidence bands. The Bland and Altman approach was used to identify the relationship between the means of 2 nights of sleep measurements and the difference between them.24,25 A sign rank test was used to evaluate the hypothesis that the mean difference between nights was not equal to zero. Intra-individual (within person) and inter-individual (between persons) variation was calculated and placed in a ratio to describe the relative magnitude of each source of variation.Stepwise regression analyses were use to relate personal characteristics of study participants with sleep characteristics, with a p-value of 0.05 as the inclusion criterion. Goodness of fit of models was assessed graphically and with the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC).SAS 9.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC) and SAS macro facility were used in performing the statistical analyses and plot the findings.RESULTSCharacteristics of Study ParticipantsCharacteristics of the total sample with PSG were similar to characteristics of the analytical sample of 285 women (Table 1). Women in the analytical sample had a median age of 52 years (IQR = 3) and a median BMI of 27.5 kg/m2, similar to the overall Sleep Study sample.Table 1 Comparing characteristics of women having the night 1 visit and at least one additional sleep staging night (n = 361) in relation to having 3 consecutive nights in the temporal order specified by the protocol, SWAN Sleep Study, 2003 to 2005VariableWith Night 1 and at least one additional sleep staging night, N = 361With 3 consecutive nights in temporal order, N = 285Median (IQR*)Median (IQR*) Age, years52.0 (3.0)52.0 (3.0) Body mass index, kg/m228.1 (10.8)27.4 (9.3) Physical Activity, continuous score7.8 (2.4)7.8 (2.4) Apnea-hypopnea Index, events/h5.0 (10.4)4.9 (10.1) Periodic Leg Movement Index, events/h2.3 (4.4)2.4 (4.4) Obesity StatusN (%)N (%) BMI < 30212 (58%)175 (61%) BMI ≥ 30153 (42%)110 (39%) Financial Strain (How hard to pay for basics)15 (4%)9 (3%) Very hard83 (23%)57 (20%) Somewhat hard Not hard266 (73%)218 (77%) Race/Ethnicity African American136 (37%)94 (33%) Chinese59 (16%)48 (17%) Caucasian170 (47%)143 (50%) Education ≤ High school61 (17%)48 (17%) Some college115 (32%)85 (30%) ≥ BS degree184 (51%)148 (53%) Health Status Worse46 (13%)30 (11%) Same106 (30%)83 (30%) Better206 (58%)168 (60%) Smoking Never238 (65%)189 (66%) Past87 (24%)66 (23%) Current40 (11%)30 (11%) Marital Status Single57 (16%)44 (16%) Married225 (63%)189 (67%) Not married76 (21%)48 (17%) Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS) Any RLS80 (22%)66 (23%) No RLS285 (78%)219 (77%) CES-D Score Not depressed305 (86%)240 (87%) Depressed48 (14%)36 (13%) Taking Sleep Medications No260 (72%)206 (73%) Yes99 (28%)75 (27%) Menopausal Status Pre- or early perimenopause240 (66%)190 (68%) Late perimenopause77 (21%)58 (20%) Surgical or postmenopause48 (13%)37 (13%)*IQR, interquartile range.Information obtained only during Night 1 included the median apnea-hypopnea index (AHI, Night 1), which was 4.9 (IQR = 10.1) episodes/h of sleep, and the median number of periodic leg movements with arousal (PLMAI), which was 2.4 (IQR = 4.4)/h of sleep, respectively.26,27 Sixty-six (23.2%) women self-identified as having restless leg syndrome (RLS).18Comparisons of PSG Measurements during 3 Consecutive PSG NightsMean TST increased from Night 1 (365 min) to Night 2 (391 min) and Night 3 (380 min) (Table 2). Mean SE% for each of the 3 nights were 83%, 85%, and 85%, respectively (Table 2). As seen in Table 2, when comparing Night 1 to Nights 2 and 3, all but 4 measures (S2 %, S1 [min], S2 [min] and Delta %) were different from each other. Three measures (Delta minutes, NUMA, and NREM) were statistically different between PSG Nights 1 and 3, but not PSG Nights 1 and 2. No statistically significant differences in the sleep measures were observed between Nights 2 and 3. Delta (%) was the only variable without significant mean differences across the 3 nights.Table 2 Comparisons of selected sleep measurements during 3 consecutive nights with PSG measures, SWAN Sleep Study, 2003 to 2005VariablesNight11st order difference*2nd order difference**Mean (SE)Δ2−1*pΔ3−1*pΔ3−2*pMeanp TST (Minutes)364.52 (4.01)26.16< 0.000115.20.005−110.06−37.15< 0.0001 logSL (Minutes)2.71 (0.05)−0.160.01−0.220.0003−0.050.720.110.26 logWASO (Minutes)3.82 (0.04)−0.140.003−0.150.003−0.010.990.120.08 SM (Percent)86.93 (0.43)1.970.00011.890.0007−0.080.99−2.050.01 SE (Percent)82.79 (0.51)2.47< 0.00012.120.002−0.350.90−2.820.002 DELTA (Percent)3.32 (0.28)0.230.490.140.90−0.090.94−0.320.26 DELTA (Minutes)11.76 (1.01)1.950.0011.350.28−0.60.74−2.550.02 REM (Percent)23.18 (0.37)1.87< 0.00011.630.0005−0.240.91−2.110.002 REM (Minutes)85.76 (1.81)12.83< 0.00019.130.0002−3.70.20−16.54< 0.0001 NUMA (Counts)19.74 (0.45)1.420.0030.810.21−0.610.40−2.030.006 NREM (Minutes)278.76 (3.07)13.330.00036.030.23−7.290.09−20.620.0004*1st order difference: Δ2−1 = Night 2−Night 1; Δ3−1 = Night 3−Night 1; Δ3−2 = Night 3−Night 2.**2nd order difference = (Night 3−Night 2) − (Night 2−Night 1) = Night 1 − 2 Night 2 + Night 3.Agreement and Variation in Data According to PSG NightThe daily difference in values and variation in data according to the different PSG nights was evaluated using the Bland and Altman approach to estimate the bias that can be discerned with repeated assessments (in Table 3 and Figure 1). For best agreement between 2 nights, the mean percent difference (or mean difference, night 2 – night 1) between 2 measures should be close to zero, with no significant correlations between the mean values and differences, i.e., the dispersion of the difference scores should be limited. While the signed rank test indicated that most differences between nights were greater than zero (Table 3), significant Bland Altman (BA) correlations were observed only in S1 (%), Delta (min), REM (%), RL (min), and RLMA (min) in comparing Night 2 to Night 1, indicating systematic differences between those 2 nights. No significant BA correlations were observed when comparing Nights 2 and 3, indicating no systematic differences between these nights.Table 3 Percent differences (Δ%) in selected sleep measures between nights with p-value of tests showing the difference is not equal to zero, and the Bland-Altman p-value for detecting possible bias, SWAN Sleep Study, 2003 to 2005Sleep variablesNight 2 versus Night1Night 3 versus Night 1Δ%*Rank Test Δ% = 0Bland-Altman pBAΔ%*Rank Test Δ% = 0Bland-Altman pBA TST (Minutes)7.40.00000.444.00.00080.99 SL (Minutes)−13.00.0060.48−18.90.00000.06 WASO (Minutes)−12.70.00030.72−12.80.00080.64 SM (Percent)2.30.00000.092.30.00040.15 SE (Percent)3.10.00000.122.60.00040.23 DELTA (Percent)12.30.060.4914.20.020.06 DELTA (Minutes)18.20.00250.00417.90.0030.005 REM (Percent)9.70.00000.047.10.00020.13 REM (Minutes)16.30.00000.4010.50.00010.42 NUMA (Counts)7.40.00080.943.20.130.14 NREM (Minutes)5.00.00010.332.00.090.84*Δ%, percent change of night b vs. night a, 100%×b−a½(a+b)Figure 1 Bland Altman plots* for total sleep time (TST-Top Figure) and sleep efficiency (SE-Bottom Figure) identifying the mean differences and bias between sleep night 1 with instrumentation for assessing respiration and restless legs versus sleep night 2 without that instrumentation, SWAN Sleep Study, 2003 to 2005Download FigureThough the BA correlations for some sleep measures (e.g., TST and SE) were not statistically significant, the mean differences shown in Table 2 and percent change shown in Table 3 and the BA plots (Figure 1) indicated potentially systematic differences between Night 1 and Night 2, especially for SE. TST and SE mean differences between Night 1 and Night 2 were non-zero, indicating a systematic difference between Nights 1 and 2. In contrast, individual PSG measures showed a high degree of agreement of between Nights 2 and 3.Within- and Between-Person VariationTo describe the variation between nights, Table 4 shows the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and their 95% confidence intervals. The highest ICCs were in Delta (%) and Delta (min) and were 0.68 and 0.66, respectively, for Night 1 to Night 3. The ICCs for Delta (%) and Delta (min) were 0.78 and 0.77, respectively, for Night 2 to Night 3. Likewise, the ICCs for Delta (%) and Delta (min) were 0.80 and 0.80, respectively, for Night 1 to Night 2 (data not shown). As seen in Table 4, measures of sleep continuity and duration were more likely to have the lower ICCs than selected measures of sleep architecture.Table 4 Intraclass correlation coefficients (with upper and lower 95% confidence intervals), intra- and inter-individual variability and the ratio of inter- to intra-individual variability for selected sleep measures, SWAN Sleep Study, 2003 to 2005Sleep variables(Night1, Night3)(Night2, Night3)ICC (95% CI)*Within σintra2**Between σinter2**Ratio σinter2/σintra2ICC (95% CI)*Within σintra2**Between σinter2**Ratio σinter2/σintra2 TST (Minutes)0.28 (0.17,0.38)349313300.380.29 (0.18, 0.39)317913280.42 logSL (Minutes)0.41 (0.31, 0.50)0.450.310.680.39 (0.29, 0.48)0.470.310.65 logWASO (Minutes)0.35 (0.24, 0.45)0.290.150.540.51 (0.42, 0.59)0.230.240.51 SM (Percent)0.28 (0.17, 0.38)39150.400.43 (0.33, 0.52)28210.76 SE (Percent)0.25 (0.14, 0.36)58190.330.37 (0.27, 0.47)44250.58 S1 (Percent)0.44 (0.34, 0.53)17130.770.62 (0.54, 0.69)9151.62 S2 (Percent)0.49 (0.40, 0.57)33310.950.56 (0.48, 0.63)25321.28 S1 (Minutes)0.47 (0.37, 0.56)1971780.900.63 (0.55, 0.70)1402371.70 S2 (Minutes)0.46 (0.36, 0.55)148212710.860.45 (0.35, 0.54)140011260.80 DELTA (Percent)0.68 (0.61, 0.74)7152.110.78 (0.73, 0.82)4.5163.57 DELTA (Minutes)0.66 (0.59, 0.72)951871.980.77 (0.72, 0.81)672293.41 REM (Percent)0.31 (0.20, 0.41)29130.450.39 (0.29, 0.48)22140.64 REM (Minutes)0.20 (0.09, 0.31)7541930.260.31 (0.20, 0.41)6262840.45 NUMA (Counts)0.49 (0.40, 0.57)30280.950.56 (0.48, 0.63)26331.26 NREM (Minutes)0.36 (0.25, 0.46)179210080.560.36 (0.25, 0.46)16959560.56 RL (Minutes)0.37 (0.27, 0.47)14598730.600.43 (0.33, 0.52)11198550.76 RLMA (Minutes)0.49 (0.40, 0.57)7917520.950.51 (0.42, 0.59)6947091.02*ICC (95% CI), Intraclass correlation coefficient and 95% CI, ICC = σinter2/(σinter2 + σintra2) = σbetween2 /(σbetween2 + σwithin2).**σintra2, intra-individual variability, within subject; σinter2,inter-individual variability, between subject.We disaggregated the within- and between-woman variation when comparing data from 2 different nights (Table 4). A low within-person variation relative to the between-person variation is generally considered optimal to characterize group differences. Delta % and Delta minutes measures included greater between-person variation relative to the amount of within-person variation. This was associated with markedly greater ratios of inter-individual variation to intra-individual variation (i.e., σinter2/σintera2); the ratios comparing Night 1 to Night 3 were 2.11 and 1.98, respectively (Table 4). Other sleep measures had substantially more within-person variation than between-person variation and lower ratios (i.e., 0.38 [TST] and 0.33% [SE]).Loss-of-Information: Two Sleep-Staging PSG Nights or One Sleep-Staging PSG NightWhen it was identified that there was high correlation between these measures according to night, it was logical to consider how much less variation is explained should the number of study nights be reduced. The amount of information lost (less variation explained) was about 23.6% or 23.5% of the total variation if only "Night 1 + Night 2" or "Night 1 + Night 3" were used. In contrast, removing any 2 of 3 nights could result in the loss of more than half the information.Participant Characteristics and Night-to-Night Sleep Measures VariabilityCharacteristics associated with having greater differences in the measures of Night 1 vs. Night 2 (i.e., Night 2 – Night 1) included obesity, financial strain, race/ethnicity, marital status, smoking, and PLMAI (see Table 5). While education, menopause status, and ph