Research
Adherence
Wrist actigraphy using standard algorithms (e.g., Cole-Kripke) provides high accuracy (approx. 86%) and sensitivity (approx. 96%) for estimating total sleep time compared to polysomnography, but exhibits low specificity (approx. 33%), leading to an overestimation of sleep and underestimation of wakefulness.
Use wrist actigraphy to track general sleep patterns and total sleep time in population studies or personal trends, but do not rely on it for precise wake time or clinical diagnosis of insomnia. Be aware that it likely overestimates sleep duration and underestimates time awake, especially if you spend significant time awake in bed.
GoodQualifiesHIGH confidence
Overall, sensitivity (0.965) and accuracy (0.863) were high, whereas specificity (0.329) was low... We conclude that actigraphy is overall a useful and valid means for estimating total sleep time and wakefulness after sleep onset in field and workplace studies, with some limitations in specificity.
Why this rating
Large sample size (n=77, 232,849 epochs), multiple study types, and rigorous statistical alignment methods.
Source
Measuring Sleep: Accuracy, Sensitivity, and Specificity of Wrist Actigraphy Compared to Polysomnography
Miguel Marino et al. · SLEEP · 2013
cross_sectional · n=77Cited 1,034×
Read the paper This is one finding among thousands. Every one is graded and traced to its source, so you can see what the evidence actually supports. Browse the research →