Teenagers who sleep longer and earlier are likely to do better at tests, study finds
A study of more than 3,000 adolescents found that those who got an early night, slept longer and had the lowest sleeping heart rates would outperform others on reading, vocabulary, problem solving and other mental tests.
Professor Barbara Sahakian, from the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Cambridge, said: 'Regularly getting a good night's sleep is important in helping us function properly, but while we know a lot about sleep in adulthood and later life, we know surprisingly little about sleep in adolescence, even though this is a crucial time in our development.
'How long do young people sleep for, for example, and what impact does this have on their brain function and cognitive performance?'
While it has long been understood that sleep plays an important role in helping bodies function, researchers were surprised by the impact of even the smallest differences in sleep.
Professor Sahakian added: 'Even though the differences in the amount of sleep that each group got was relatively small, at just over a quarter-of-an-hour between the best and worst sleepers, we could still see differences in brain structure and activity and in how well they did at tasks. This drives home to us just how important it is to have a good night's sleep at this important time in life.'
Typically, studies looking at how young people sleep have relied on self-reporting, which can be inaccurate. Researchers at Fudan University, Shanghai, and the University of Cambridge turned to data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study, the largest long-term study of brain development and child health in the United States.
As part of this study, researchers gave young people Fitbits to gather objective data on their sleep patterns and compare it against brain scans and results from cognitive tests.
They found the adolescents could be divided into one of three groups. Group one, accounting for 39 per cent of participants, slept an average of seven hours and 10 minutes. They tended to sleep the latest and wake the earliest. Group two, accounting for 24 per cent, slept an average of seven hours and 21 minutes, with average levels across all sleep characteristics.
Meanwhile, group three, accounting for 37 per cent, slept an average of seven hours and 25 minutes. They went to bed and fell asleep the earliest, and had lower heart rates during sleep.
Researchers found no significant differences in the school achievements between these groups, but group three outperformed the other two when it came to cognitive tests looking at vocabulary, reading, problem solving and focus. They also had the largest brain volume and best brain functions, while group one had the smallest volume and poorest brain functions.
First author Dr Qing Ma from Fudan University said: 'Although our study can't answer conclusively whether young people have better brain function and perform better at tests because they sleep better, there are a number of studies that would support this idea.
'For example, research has shown the benefits of sleep on memory, especially on memory consolidation, which is important for learning.'
The American Academy of Sleep Medicine says that the ideal amount of sleep during adolescence is between eight and 10 hours.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
3 hours ago
- Leader Live
Less aggressive treatment for low-risk breast cancer ‘just as effective'
The technique, which has since been adopted by the NHS, has 'transformed' the way the disease is treated in its early stages, researchers said. More than 37,000 women have radiotherapy for breast cancer in the UK every year. The treatment uses radiation to kill cancer cells and is usually given after surgery to reduce the risk of the disease coming back. However, side-effects can include changes in breast size and shape, swelling in the arms or breast, and pain. The Import Low trial, led by The Institute of Cancer Research, London, and the University of Cambridge, found limiting radiation to the tumour area, rather than treating the whole breast, was just as effective. The study included 2,018 women across 30 radiotherapy centres in the UK, who were monitored for 10 years after treatment. It compared three radiotherapy approaches; whole-breast, partial-breast and a reduced-dose. After a decade, cancer recurrence rates in the group given partial radiotherapy was 3%, the same proportion as those who had been treated with a more aggressive approach. Patients who had targeted radiotherapy were also less likely to experience long-term changes in breast appearance. Some 15% reported noticeable changes at five years compared with 27% in the whole-breast radiotherapy group. Dr Anna Kirby, consultant clinical oncologist at The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, and reader in breast cancer radiotherapy at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, said: 'The long-term results of this study confirm that a less aggressive approach, limiting radiotherapy to the tumour rather than the whole breast, is just as effective as traditional whole-breast radiotherapy. 'Patients receiving partial-breast radiotherapy experience fewer side-effects while maintaining excellent cancer control.' Charlotte Coles, a professor of breast cancer clinical oncology at the University of Cambridge, honorary clinical oncology consultant at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, and chief investigator of the Import Low study, said the trial has 'transformed' how early breast cancer is treated. Following the study, which is published in the Lancet Oncology, partial-breast radiotherapy has been integrated into NHS treatment guidelines. It is hoped that more than 9,000 women in the UK could benefit from more targeted treatment. 'By targeting the area around the tumour, rather than the whole breast, we have demonstrated that patients can achieve the same outstanding long-term outcomes with fewer complications,' Prof Coles said. 'This approach is now widely adopted across the NHS, sparing thousands of women from unnecessary radiation exposure. 'The results of this study have not only shaped UK clinical practice but also informed international guidelines, ensuring that women worldwide benefit from this personalised, evidence-based treatment.' Hilary Stobart, now 70, was diagnosed with ER-positive breast cancer in December 2008, with a 2cm tumour in her left breast. Ms Stobart, who was 54 at the time, was offered the chance to take part in the trial after surgery and was treated with partial radiotherapy. 'I had three weeks of radiotherapy, but suffered no side-effects, other than some soreness in my breast and nipple in the first few weeks,' she said. 'Ten years on, I am doing fine. I have no side-effects and no recurrence of disease. 'For me personally, I am very thankful to have received the lowest dose of radiotherapy. 'Whilst I may have had some niggling worries in the early days, having seen the results of the trial, I feel positive and optimistic now. I know that I was lucky enough back then to have had the best treatment, a treatment that other women will be routinely offered now.' Dr Fay Cafferty, lead statistician at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, added that the findings are 'crucial in reinforcing the long-term safety and effectiveness of partial-breast radiotherapy'. 'Long-term data is vital to ensure we know there's no greater risk of breast cancer returning after this targeted radiotherapy treatment,' she said. 'This latest analysis confirms that partial breast radiotherapy remains a safe and effective treatment option, supporting its continued adoption as the standard of care in the UK and globally.'
South Wales Guardian
4 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Less aggressive treatment for low-risk breast cancer ‘just as effective'
The technique, which has since been adopted by the NHS, has 'transformed' the way the disease is treated in its early stages, researchers said. More than 37,000 women have radiotherapy for breast cancer in the UK every year. The treatment uses radiation to kill cancer cells and is usually given after surgery to reduce the risk of the disease coming back. However, side-effects can include changes in breast size and shape, swelling in the arms or breast, and pain. The Import Low trial, led by The Institute of Cancer Research, London, and the University of Cambridge, found limiting radiation to the tumour area, rather than treating the whole breast, was just as effective. The study included 2,018 women across 30 radiotherapy centres in the UK, who were monitored for 10 years after treatment. It compared three radiotherapy approaches; whole-breast, partial-breast and a reduced-dose. After a decade, cancer recurrence rates in the group given partial radiotherapy was 3%, the same proportion as those who had been treated with a more aggressive approach. Patients who had targeted radiotherapy were also less likely to experience long-term changes in breast appearance. Some 15% reported noticeable changes at five years compared with 27% in the whole-breast radiotherapy group. Dr Anna Kirby, consultant clinical oncologist at The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, and reader in breast cancer radiotherapy at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, said: 'The long-term results of this study confirm that a less aggressive approach, limiting radiotherapy to the tumour rather than the whole breast, is just as effective as traditional whole-breast radiotherapy. 'Patients receiving partial-breast radiotherapy experience fewer side-effects while maintaining excellent cancer control.' Charlotte Coles, a professor of breast cancer clinical oncology at the University of Cambridge, honorary clinical oncology consultant at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, and chief investigator of the Import Low study, said the trial has 'transformed' how early breast cancer is treated. Following the study, which is published in the Lancet Oncology, partial-breast radiotherapy has been integrated into NHS treatment guidelines. It is hoped that more than 9,000 women in the UK could benefit from more targeted treatment. 'By targeting the area around the tumour, rather than the whole breast, we have demonstrated that patients can achieve the same outstanding long-term outcomes with fewer complications,' Prof Coles said. 'This approach is now widely adopted across the NHS, sparing thousands of women from unnecessary radiation exposure. 'The results of this study have not only shaped UK clinical practice but also informed international guidelines, ensuring that women worldwide benefit from this personalised, evidence-based treatment.' Hilary Stobart, now 70, was diagnosed with ER-positive breast cancer in December 2008, with a 2cm tumour in her left breast. Ms Stobart, who was 54 at the time, was offered the chance to take part in the trial after surgery and was treated with partial radiotherapy. 'I had three weeks of radiotherapy, but suffered no side-effects, other than some soreness in my breast and nipple in the first few weeks,' she said. 'Ten years on, I am doing fine. I have no side-effects and no recurrence of disease. 'For me personally, I am very thankful to have received the lowest dose of radiotherapy. 'Whilst I may have had some niggling worries in the early days, having seen the results of the trial, I feel positive and optimistic now. I know that I was lucky enough back then to have had the best treatment, a treatment that other women will be routinely offered now.' Dr Fay Cafferty, lead statistician at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, added that the findings are 'crucial in reinforcing the long-term safety and effectiveness of partial-breast radiotherapy'. 'Long-term data is vital to ensure we know there's no greater risk of breast cancer returning after this targeted radiotherapy treatment,' she said. 'This latest analysis confirms that partial breast radiotherapy remains a safe and effective treatment option, supporting its continued adoption as the standard of care in the UK and globally.'
Rhyl Journal
4 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
Less aggressive treatment for low-risk breast cancer ‘just as effective'
The technique, which has since been adopted by the NHS, has 'transformed' the way the disease is treated in its early stages, researchers said. More than 37,000 women have radiotherapy for breast cancer in the UK every year. The treatment uses radiation to kill cancer cells and is usually given after surgery to reduce the risk of the disease coming back. However, side-effects can include changes in breast size and shape, swelling in the arms or breast, and pain. The Import Low trial, led by The Institute of Cancer Research, London, and the University of Cambridge, found limiting radiation to the tumour area, rather than treating the whole breast, was just as effective. The study included 2,018 women across 30 radiotherapy centres in the UK, who were monitored for 10 years after treatment. It compared three radiotherapy approaches; whole-breast, partial-breast and a reduced-dose. After a decade, cancer recurrence rates in the group given partial radiotherapy was 3%, the same proportion as those who had been treated with a more aggressive approach. Patients who had targeted radiotherapy were also less likely to experience long-term changes in breast appearance. Some 15% reported noticeable changes at five years compared with 27% in the whole-breast radiotherapy group. Dr Anna Kirby, consultant clinical oncologist at The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, and reader in breast cancer radiotherapy at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, said: 'The long-term results of this study confirm that a less aggressive approach, limiting radiotherapy to the tumour rather than the whole breast, is just as effective as traditional whole-breast radiotherapy. 'Patients receiving partial-breast radiotherapy experience fewer side-effects while maintaining excellent cancer control.' Charlotte Coles, a professor of breast cancer clinical oncology at the University of Cambridge, honorary clinical oncology consultant at Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, and chief investigator of the Import Low study, said the trial has 'transformed' how early breast cancer is treated. Following the study, which is published in the Lancet Oncology, partial-breast radiotherapy has been integrated into NHS treatment guidelines. It is hoped that more than 9,000 women in the UK could benefit from more targeted treatment. 'By targeting the area around the tumour, rather than the whole breast, we have demonstrated that patients can achieve the same outstanding long-term outcomes with fewer complications,' Prof Coles said. 'This approach is now widely adopted across the NHS, sparing thousands of women from unnecessary radiation exposure. 'The results of this study have not only shaped UK clinical practice but also informed international guidelines, ensuring that women worldwide benefit from this personalised, evidence-based treatment.' Hilary Stobart, now 70, was diagnosed with ER-positive breast cancer in December 2008, with a 2cm tumour in her left breast. Ms Stobart, who was 54 at the time, was offered the chance to take part in the trial after surgery and was treated with partial radiotherapy. 'I had three weeks of radiotherapy, but suffered no side-effects, other than some soreness in my breast and nipple in the first few weeks,' she said. 'Ten years on, I am doing fine. I have no side-effects and no recurrence of disease. 'For me personally, I am very thankful to have received the lowest dose of radiotherapy. 'Whilst I may have had some niggling worries in the early days, having seen the results of the trial, I feel positive and optimistic now. I know that I was lucky enough back then to have had the best treatment, a treatment that other women will be routinely offered now.' Dr Fay Cafferty, lead statistician at The Institute of Cancer Research, London, added that the findings are 'crucial in reinforcing the long-term safety and effectiveness of partial-breast radiotherapy'. 'Long-term data is vital to ensure we know there's no greater risk of breast cancer returning after this targeted radiotherapy treatment,' she said. 'This latest analysis confirms that partial breast radiotherapy remains a safe and effective treatment option, supporting its continued adoption as the standard of care in the UK and globally.'
