Health outcome differences between those with treated insomnia and matched controls.

<p>ER = Emergency room; MCS = Mental component summary; PCS = Physical component summary.</p><p>Health outcome differences between those with treated insomnia and matched controls.</p

Analysis flowchart.

<p>Black solid arrows indicate groups which are direct subsets of other groups. Dotted arrows indicate which groups were entered into, and exited from, propensity score matching models. Grey double-arrows indicate the groups that were statistically compared in the main analyses.</p

Demographics and health behaviors among respondents in the control group and respondents with insomnia.

<p>Demographics and health behaviors among respondents in the control group and respondents with insomnia.</p

Response latency.

<p>(a) Mean response latency as a function of the number of dots. The data of the four younger groups (20–60-yr-old) were combined as shown by a blue curve. For the range of 1 to 6 dots, the latency of the older group is prolonged by 20% when compared with that of the younger group. Note that the symbol legends are listed in panel C. (b) Change in response latency. The latency data is recalculated as percentage change relative to the 20–40-yr-old group mean – positive values indicate longer latencies than the youngest age group, and vice versa. Left panel: numerosity 1 & 2 (subitizing). Right panel: numerosity 4 & 5 (counting). (c) Determination of subitizing span. A bi-linear function was used to fit the mean response latency data, with the intersection point representing the subitizing range. The subitizing speed (the slope before the intersection point) and counting speed (the slope after the intersection point) are both slowed down by 10% in older observers.</p

Adjusted health outcome differences between those with and without adverse events among those with insomnia taking a medication in the US.

<p>ER = Emergency room; MCS = Mental component summary; PCS = Physical component summary.</p><p>All models controlled for age, sex, smoking status and CCI.</p><p>Adjusted health outcome differences between those with and without adverse events among those with insomnia taking a medication in the US.</p

Visual stimuli.

<p>The stimulus sequence started with a fixation mark (a), and then a counting target for 200 ms (b), which was then followed by a black-and-white checkerboard mask for another 100 ms (c). Note that the fixation target was presented in a gray background, instead of a white background. (d) An example illustrating the design and physical dimensions of the dot stimulus. The task is to enumerate the number of dots (<i>N</i> = 1–10) in the display, and say the number into a microphone for the measurement of response latency.</p

Counting accuracy.

<p>(a) Mean number of dots reported as a function of the number of dots displayed. In general, a very slight undercounting occurred when there were nine or more dots on the screen. (b) Undercountng/overcounting. The response accuracy data is replotted as signed derivation from the actual numerosity (number of dots reported - number of dots presented). Overcounting (+): more than the number of dots displayed. Undercounting (-): less than the number of dots displayed. Younger observers tend to overcount in the range of 4–6 dots and undercount thereafter, and older observers (red symbols) shows even more over-counting (relatively more positive in magnitude) when the numerosity is greater than 4.</p

Counting threshold.

<p>(a) Mean hit rate as a function of the number of dots. A Weibull function was used to fit the data. The curves were gradually displaced to the left with advancing age. Dotted lines show the counting thresholds for two age groups: 21–30- and 61–85-year-old. (b) Mean counting thresholds and standard errors for different age groups. To better display the variation in counting threshold in older adults, the age group 61–85-yr was split into two groups here for visualization: 61–70- yr-old and 71–85-yr-old. (c) Threshold data for individual observers (n = 104) as a function of age. A second-order polynomial function was used to fit the data. Two older observers failed to perform the task for 200 ms, therefore the stimulus duration was increased to 500 ms (dark pink circle: JP) and 700 ms (green circle: CB).</p