Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Prevention trials

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background Sleep quality has been associated with human health and diseases, including cognitive decline and dementia; however major determinants of sleep disorders are largely unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between sleep quality and adherence to the Mediterranean dietary pattern in a sample of Italian adults. Methods A total of 1936 individuals were recruited in the urban area of Catania during 2014-2015 through random sampling. A food frequency questionnaire and validated instruments were used to assess the adherence to the Mediterranean diet and sleep quality (Pittsburg sleep quality index). Multivariate logistic regressions were performed to determine the association between exposure and outcome. Results A total of 1314 individuals (67.9% of the cohort) reported adequate sleep quality: for each point increase of the Mediterranean diet score, individuals were 10% more likely to have adequate sleep quality. In an additional analysis stratifying the sample by weight status, the association between sleep quality and high adherence to the Mediterranean diet was observed only among normal/overweight individuals but not in obese participants. Conclusions high adherence to a Mediterranean diet is associated with better sleep quality either toward direct effect on health or indirect effects through improvement of weight status.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Godos, J., Ferri, R., Caraci, F., Cosentino, F. I. I., Castellano, S., Galvano, F., et al. (2019). Adherence to the Mediterranean Diet is Associated with Better Sleep Quality in Italian Adults. Nutrients. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11050976

Vancouver

Godos J, Ferri R, Caraci F, Cosentino FII, Castellano S, Galvano F, et al. Adherence to the Mediterranean Diet is Associated with Better Sleep Quality in Italian Adults. Nutrients. 2019. doi:10.3390/nu11050976. PMID: 31035395.

BibTeX

@article{godos2019-31035395,
  author  = {Godos, J. and Ferri, R. and Caraci, F. and Cosentino, F. I. I. and Castellano, S. and Galvano, F. and Grosso, G.},
  title   = {{Adherence to the Mediterranean Diet is Associated with Better Sleep Quality in Italian Adults}},
  journal = {Nutrients},
  year    = {2019},
  doi     = {10.3390/nu11050976},
  pmid    = {31035395},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11050976}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 59/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 0 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 2 of 2. 34 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 59 of 100. Total 59 of 100.34 of the 58 points we could judge = 59 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 34 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 59 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Nutrients)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 0 / 12 No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 1,936 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31035395)
Free to read 2 / 2 Free to read
Points 34 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 59 out of 100.
Total 59 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Related studies in Prevention trials

Also tagged “controlled”

1,118 studies in the library carry the topic tag “controlled”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,118 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Prevention trials

See all studies in Prevention trials →