Usage Information
Abstract
Circadian disruption is pervasive and can occur at multiple organizational levels, contributing to poor health outcomes at individual and population levels. Evidence points to a bidirectional relationship, in that circadian disruption increases disease severity and many diseases can disrupt circadian rhythms. Importantly, circadian disruption can increase the risk for the expression and development of neurologic, psychiatric, cardiometabolic, and immune disorders. Thus, harnessing the rich findings from preclinical and translational research in circadian biology to enhance health via circadian-based approaches represents a unique opportunity for personalized/precision medicine and overall societal well-being. In this Review, we discuss the implications of circadian disruption for human health using a bench-to-bedside approach. Evidence from preclinical and translational science is applied to a clinical and population-based approach. Given the broad implications of circadian regulation for human health, this Review focuses its discussion on selected examples in neurologic, psychiatric, metabolic, cardiovascular, allergic, and immunologic disorders that highlight the interrelatedness between circadian disruption and human disease and the potential of circadian-based interventions, such as bright light therapy and exogenous melatonin, as well as chronotherapy to improve and/or modify disease outcomes.
Authors
Anna B. Fishbein, Kristen L. Knutson, Phyllis C. Zee
Usage data is cumulative from September 2025 through September 2026.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 12,209 | 4,951 |
| 1,252 | 755 | |
| Figure | 758 | 0 |
| Citation downloads | 649 | 0 |
| Totals | 14,868 | 5,706 |
| Total Views | 20,574 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.
Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN: 0021-9738 (print), 1558-8238 (online)