Skip to main content

Table 2 PSQI scores, SCL90 scores, and PSG characteristics of all participants

From: Sleep EEG characteristics associated with total sleep time misperception in young adults: an exploratory study

Variable

GS (n = 10)

IWHM(n = 18)

IWLM (n = 19)

Statistics

PSQI total score

3.5 [2.0, 6.2]

13.5 [11.5,16.3]a

11.0 [9.0, 14.0]a

H = 18.882, P < 0.001

SCL-90 total score

109.5 [103.5, 129.3]

174.5 [155.8, 223.8]a

148.0 [127.5, 180.0]a

H = 16.037, P < 0.001

TST (min)

394.25 ± 45.25

415.06 ± 40.20

381.95 ± 39.85

F = 3.026, P = 0.059

SPT (min)

418.60 ± 47.39

459.03 ± 42.65

431.84 ± 49.77

F = 2.837, P = 0.069

SE, %

89.27 ± 3.92

87.84 ± 7.00

86.24 ± 8.39

F = 0.626, P = 0.540

SOL (min)

11.50 [7.13, 23.38]

8.25 [4.00, 12.63]

5.50 [3.00, 10.00]

H = 2.697, P = 0.260

%NREM stage1

5.00 [3.00, 6.25]

5.00 [4.00, 8.50]

4.00 [3.00, 7.00]

H = 1.158, P = 0.560

%NREM stage2

59.40 ± 8.51

61.17 ± 8.61

62.16 ± 7.63

F = 0.371, P = 0.692

% SWS

13.60 ± 4.79

10.06 ± 6.49

12.37 ± 4.82

F = 1.528, P = 0.228

%REM

21.90 ± 6.61

22.61 ± 3.27

19.31 ± 5.14

F = 2.259, P = 0.116

Number of awakenings

23.50 [19.50, 29.50]

24.00 [16.00, 31.00]

19.00 [13.00, 27.00]

H = 2.147, P = 0.342

Number of arousals

17.00 [8.25,20.50]

24.00 [12.75, 47.50]

26.00 [17.00, 47.00]

H = 3. 730, P = 0.155

Arousal index

2.69 [1.22, 3.21]

3.71 [1.77,7.42]

4.17 [2.28,7.55]

H = 3. 611, P = 0.164

Number of arousals of NREM

15.00 [8.25, 20.50]

19.50 [10.00, 46.50]

22.00 [17.00, 41.00]

H = 3.233, P = 0.199

Number of arousals of REM

0.00 [0.00, 3.00]

1.00 [0.00, 3.25]

1.00 [0.00, 5.00]

H = 1.339, P = 0.512

  1. GS: good sleeper; IWLM: insomnias with a low mismatch; IWHM: insomnias with a high mismatch
  2. PSQI: Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index; TST: total sleep time; SPT: sleep period time; SE: sleep efficiency; SOL: sleep onset latency; NREM: non-rapid eye movement; SWS: slow wave sleep; REM: rapid eye movement
  3. The statistical value H represents the use of a Kruskal–Wallis non-parametric analysis among three group using a Bonferroni correction for post-hoc analysis, while the statistical value F represents the use of a one-way ANOVA using the least significant difference test for post-hoc analysis
  4. aP < 0.05 versus GS. There was no difference between the IWHW and IWLW groups