Protocol for a prospective, multi-centric, cross-sectional 1 cohort study to assess personal light exposure

Abstract


Introduction Background
Light significantly affects human health and behaviour, from modulation of circadian rhythms and sleep to regulation of cognitive and neuroendocrine functions (Blume et al., 2019).The effects of light on human physiology can be observed acutely as changes in alertness and mood, according to timing and intensity of light stimuli (Cibeira et al., 2021;Lok et al., 2018).Furthermore, long-lasting consequences on the endocrine and immune systems are known to follow chronic exposure to artificial light at night, as this induces misalignment with the environmental day/night cycle.For example, shift workers have an increased risk of developing diseases such as cancer and metabolic disorders (Lunn et al., 2017;Moreno et al., 2019;Ward et al., 2019).
The human relationship to light has fundamentally changed over the past decades with the advent of highly efficient light-emitting diode (LED) lamps and emissive displays such as smartphones and laptops (Westland et al., 2017).The increased availability and luminous output of these novel light sources, together with the large number of people in modern 24/7 society suffering from circadian misalignment, pose the question of how these light exposure patterns affect our mental and physical health.Recent expert consensus-based recommendations by Brown and colleagues (2022) provide a framework for understanding the appropriate light amounts for healthy, day-active individuals during daytime, evening, and nighttime hours to maintain optimal physiology and circadian health.Whether the "spectral diet" or the light exposure patterns experienced by an individual (Webler et al., 2019) meets these recommendations has not yet been established.
Over the past 20 years, researchers in this field have attempted to measure personal light exposure in field settings using various wearable devices (Hartmeyer et al., 2022).These devices, known as light loggers, can be worn in various positions on the body, including the wrist (e.g. as a wristwatch), chest (e.g. as a pendant or brooch), or eye level (e.g. on a pair of glasses) by study participants.When worn continuously over time, these wearable devices approximate the retinal irradiance an individual receives daily.The melanopic retinal irradiance drives the physiological effects of light (Spitschan et al., 2022).Light exposure patterns can yield light metrics, including time spent above a specific light threshold (time above threshold, TAT; (Hartmeyer & Andersen, 2023)) and variability of light timing (mean light timing, MLiT; (Reid et al., 2014)).These metrics can subsequently be linked to health outcomes of interest (Spitschan et al., 2022).For example, field studies using wrist-worn light loggers have shown an association between greater light exposure before sleep with lower self-reported alertness during the day (Didikoglu et al., 2023), poorer objective sleep quality (Cain et al., 2020), differences in sleep-wake consolidaton (Lok et al., 2023), and altered sleep architecture (Wams et al., . 2017).Furthermore, higher light exposure during sleep has been linked to later sleep offset and poorer sleep continuity (Mead et al., 2023).
As wearable light loggers become more accessible, research on light exposure patterns in free-living conditions has surged (Hartmeyer et al., 2022).Much of the literature, however, remains descriptive, linking light metrics to one or two health outcomes of interest, usually related to cognitive performance and sleep health.While highly informative, these investigations fail to capture the contextual and behavioural dimensions leading to a given light exposure pattern.An individual's "spectral diet" ultimately depends on many factors, including environmental ones (geographical location, season, climate and photoperiod) as well as interindividual ones (culture, personal habits, behaviour, commute type and profession).Furthermore, while some determinants of daily light exposure are independent of the individual (e.g.type of lights present in one's office), individuals can exert a level of control on their light exposure by actively seeking or avoiding behaviours which involve specific light exposure (e.g.having lunch break outside or inside) (Siraji, Lazar, et al., 2023;Siraji, Spitschan, et al., 2023).
Considering the growing evidence that well-timed light exposure is crucial to support human health, it is vital not only to describe the timing and quantities of light that individuals receive during the day but also to understand which contextual and behavioural factors contribute to specific light exposure patterns.This information is essential to identify populations at risk of receiving insufficient or aberrant light exposure throughout the day and, ultimately, to design effective personalised interventions to improve people's light exposure.
Here, we outline a comprehensive study protocol for field studies to collect rich and high-quality datasets comprising of light exposure data and its contextual and behavioural contributors.To obtain clean light exposure data from the light loggers, we describe in detail how to instruct participants and ensure their compliance with the protocol.Additionally, we present a questionnaire structure designed to capture daily factors linked to individual light exposure using a mobile app interface.Overall, this protocol provides a framework that researchers interested in collecting light exposure data can flexibly adjust.We will use this protocol to create a reference dataset that characterises individual light exposure over seven days at five different geographical locations in Europe.Our dataset will characterise light exposure and probe the suitability of light logging devices in different geographical and sociocultural contexts.This will help identify context-and lifestyle-specific factors associated with healthy light exposure patterns, which will serve as a first step to designing effective public health interventions.

Prior evidence
Table 1 summarises some relevant prior literature underlying our research questions.For a systematic overview of prior studies, see (Hartmeyer et al., 2022).Bierman et al. (2005), Higgins et al.
. (2010), Rea et al. (2011), andSmolders et al. (2013) used a head-mounted device that measures personal light exposure at the corneal plane.The device was tested in various settings with different outcome measures.A similar device, which provides eye-level illuminance data, was presented by Hubalek and colleagues (2010).Bajaj et al. (2011a) investigated the correlation between self-reported subjective light exposure via a seven-day retrospective questionnaire and photopic light exposure objectively measured by a head-mounted light dosimeter.These studies are relevant to our research as we intend to use an adapted version of their questionnaire to measure daily personal light exposure.Furthermore, the studies by Brown et al. (2021) and Cheng et al. (2021) describe novel, non-physiological methods to predict individuals' circadian phases.Finally, the studies by (Balajadia et al., 2023) and van Duijnhoven et al. (2017) highlight the limitations of current corneal-plane light loggers placed laterally on glasses in ensuring high-quality data experience by participants.

Objectives
The three objectives of the study are 1.To characterise individuals' light exposure over seven days utilizing a near-corneal-plane light logger placed at the centre of non-prescription glasses frame, along with a light logger as a chest-worn pendant and a wrist-worn light logger; 2. To collect data across four countries (Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and Turkey); and 3. To investigate the correlations between recommended light exposure, physiological variables such as chronotype and light sensitivity, and behavioral outcomes including exercise, mood, and alertness.

Sample Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Eligible participants will be selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria listed in Table 2.
These include demographic as well as mental and physical health parameters.Individuals with corrected vision requiring prescription glasses during the experimental week will be excluded due to incompatibility with our light glasses.However, individuals with a) prescription lenses or b) prescription glasses but are able and willing to wear prescription contact lenses during the experimental week will .be able to participate in our study.Individuals suffering from psychiatric or sleep disorders will be excluded from the study.Furthermore, intake of any drugs and/or medications known to influence photosensitivity will be considered a criterion for exclusion.Finally, only people based at or near (<60 km) the local hubs of each geographical location during the weekdays (Monday to Friday) of the experiment will be accepted for this study to have similar environmental conditions across participants at each measurement hub.All criteria mentioned above for inclusion and exclusion will be assessed by self-report through an online platform developed for this purpose (Research Electronic Data Capture, REDCap; (Harris et al., 2009(Harris et al., , 2019(Harris et al., , 2022))).The eligibility criteria used here can be modified for studies in which the goal is to assess a different population.

Participant recruitment
Participants will be recruited by self-selection through advertisements which will be posted at the local hubs (Spain: FUSP-CEU, Sweden: RISE, Netherlands: THUAS, Germany: BAuA, TUM, Turkey: IZTECH) as well as in local newsletters.Participants interested in the study will be directed to an online platform (REDCap) for the initial screening survey.Detailed information about the study and its aim will be provided during this screening step.Inclusion and exclusion criteria will be tested using a questionnaire on the same online platform.This questionnaire will also collect demographic data (age, sex, gender, native language(s) and occupational status).If eligible for the study, participants will then be contacted by the experimenters to agree on possible participation dates and discuss any further questions.
Furthermore, they will be sent a picture of what the light logger looks like and asked if they feel comfortable wearing them throughout the experimental week.They will also be informed about the availability of the researchers throughout the experiment in case of doubts or technical issues with the light logger.Participants will be compensated at the end of the study according to their compliance with the experimental procedure: for every day of wearing the light logger for at least 80% of their waking hours (as defined by the Munich Chronotype Questionnaire; MCTQ) (Roenneberg et al., 2015), volunteers will receive financial compensation, such that those adhering to the whole duration of the experiment will receive more than those adhering, for example, to only four out of the seven experimental days.The rates of financial compensation will depend on each measurement site and local customs.

Stopping guidelines
Data collection can terminate after reaching at least n=15 per site, with a target of n=30.The researchers will terminate the study for an individual participant in case of technical issues which do not allow the experiment to continue, e.g., when the light logger is not working as expected. .

Personal light logging
To measure personal light exposure, we will deploy ActLumus light loggers (Condor Instruments, São Paulo, Brazil) worn by participants for one week.ActLumus light loggers contain ten spectral channels, the outputs of which are combined to estimate photopic and melanopic irradiance.Throughout the trial, participants will wear three light loggers: 1. To measure light centrally in the near-corneal plane, the light loggers will be placed on the frame of non-prescription glasses.A 3D-printed holder for the light loggers has been designed and attached to the bridge of the glasses frame, enabling the insertion and removal of the ActLumus devices.
2. To measure light on the chest, the light loggers will be clipped to clothing or worn as a pendant.
3. To measure light on the wrist, a conventional location, the light loggers will be worn with manufacturer-provided wrist bands.
The sampling interval of each ActLumus light logger will be set to 10 seconds to achieve highly temporally resolved data, and the devices will never be turned off nor charged during the experimental week.Light exposure data for each participant will then be downloaded only upon the return of the devices on the final Monday (day 8).The choice of light loggers used here can vary depending on the availability.
As the use of non-prescription glasses still requires the use of lenses without optical power, the transmittance properties of the lenses will be measured between 250 and 2500 nm.

Activity measurement
One of the ActLumus light loggers will be worn on the wrist.The ActLumus measures movement through an integrated tri-axial accelerometer and is used in field studies such as ours to distinguish wake and sleep time.Participants will be instructed to keep the wrist-worn device on during the day and night and only remove it when in contact with water and during contact sports.

First-day questionnaires (Chronotype questionnaires)
On the first day of the experiment, participants completed two questionnaires measuring circadian time and circadian preference: the Munich Chronotype Questionnaire (MCTQ, (Roenneberg et al., 2015)) and the Morning-Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ, (Horne & Östberg, 1977)).The MCTQ is .used to assess circadian time using questions about their sleep and wake habits during work and free days and commute type.The MEQ is used to determine the circadian preference of individuals to perform certain activities at specific times of the day.

Continuous questionnaires
All continuous measurements except the Light exposure and activity diary are completed by participants on the MyCap app (Harris et al., 2022).This mobile application for survey data collection integrates with REDCap (Harris et al., 2009(Harris et al., , 2019)).

Wear log
Throughout the day, participants are instructed to report their wear and non-wear time (only concerning the spectacle-worn glasses) in a digital log book.Specifically, they have five choices of wear log entry: 1 = "Taking the light glasses off", 2 = "Putting the light glasses on", 3 = "Taking the light glasses off before sleep and placing them on a nightstand or flat surface", 4 = "Leaving <study location > and its surroundings (60 km radius)" and 5 = "Re-entering < study location > and its surroundings (60 km radius)".For options 1 to 3, participants also press the button on the light glasses to signal an event occurring, and in the case of 1, they are asked to confirm whether they place the light glasses in the black bag provided to them and if they are in movement.Options 4 and 5 are introduced to control for potential differences in personal light exposure due to environmental availability rather than behaviour.For all the five wear log entry choices, participants must state whether they are logging a present or a past event.
Additionally, participants are asked for the reasons they took the off ("What is prompting you to remove the light logger?"), with the options "Sports activity", "Leisure activity where I do not feel comfortable wearing the light logger (e.g.public space)", "Activity involving contact with water (e.g., showering or bathing)", "Discomfort due to wearing the light glasses (e.g.disturbance to eyesight or pain due to weight)" and "Other (please specify)".

Experience log
During the week, participants also have the opportunity to report their experiences with the light glasses using a log on the app.This log prompts participants to describe situations in which they received verbal or nonverbal feedback from others and personal comfort with wearing the light glasses.They are also asked whether and how these experiences might influence their future use of the light glasses. .

Morning sleep log
Every morning after waking up, participants fill in the core Consensus Sleep Diary (Carney et al., 2012) consisting of 9 items to assess their sleep timing, sleep duration during the night, and subjective sleep quality.This last item is scored on a five-point Likert scale (1 = "Very poor" to 5 = "Very good").
Ecological momentary assessment ("Current conditions") Four times a day (at 11:00, 14:00, 17:00 and 20:00), participants fill in a questionnaire concerning their current light conditions, mood and sleepiness.The researcher sends a reminder message through the REDCap/MyCap messaging channel, and phone alarms set by participants at these times serve to ensure compliance.Firstly, current light conditions are tested through a multiple-choice question, where participants can choose one of 8 possible light scenarios as the "main light source" and, if applicable, as the "secondary light source".The potential light sources to choose from consist of the same categories listed in the modified Harvard Light Exposure Assessment diary, which participants fill in every evening (see "Light exposure and activity diary", H-LEA; (Bajaj et al., 2011b)).Secondly, a modified MoodZoom questionnaire (Tsanas et al., 2016) assesses current mood.Lastly, sleepiness is assessed using the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS; (Akerstedt & Gillberg, 1990)) on a 10-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = "Extremely alert" to 10 = "Extremely sleepy, fighting sleep".

Exercise log
Every evening before sleep, participants complete a custom-made questionnaire about the exercise they performed during the day.This questionnaire was designed to assess intensity (vigorous/moderate/light, lack of exercise) and location (indoors/outdoors) of exercise, as well as sedentary time ("How much time did you spend sitting or reclining?").

Wellbeing log
Every evening before sleep, participants complete a modified version of the WHO-5 Wellbeing Index (Bech, P., 2004), consisting of 5 statements (1 = "I have felt cheerful and in good spirits", 2 = "I have felt calm and relaxed", 3 = "I have felt active and vigorous", 4 = "How would you rate the quality of your sleep last night?",and 5 = "My daily life has been filled with things that interest me").Participants have to express agreement using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 0 = "At no time" to 5 = "All of the time" (for statements 1, 2, 3 and 5) and from 1 = "Very poor" to 5 = "Very good" for statement 4.

Worktime log
Every evening before sleep, participants complete a custom-made questionnaire on the clock times they went to their workplace, how, and when they returned home. .

Light exposure and activity log
Every evening, participants have to fill in a modified version of the Harvard Light Exposure Assessment (H-LEA; (Bajaj et al., 2011b)).This is referred to as "mH-LEA" and is done on paper using a form provided by the experimenter during the in-person visit (see Appendix).Participants are asked to report, for each hour of the day, the primary light source they are exposed to and the activity they performed in that hour.The primary light source is described as "the biggest and brightest light source".They can choose between 8 light categories (L = "Electric light source indoors (e.g., lamps such as LEDs)", S = "Electric light source outdoors (e.g., street lights)", I = "Daylight indoors (through windows)", O = "Daylight outdoors (including being in the shade)", E = "Emissive displays (e.g., smartphone, laptop etc.)", D = "Darkness (outdoors and/or indoors)", W = "Light entering from outside during sleep (e.g., daylight, street lights etc.)").If they believe they are exposed to a combination of lights within the same hour, they can choose from the following combinations: "L+I", "L+E", "I+E", "S+O", and "D+W".With regards to their activity, they could choose between "8 categories (1 = "Sleeping in bed", 2 = "Awake at home", 3 = "On the road with public transport/car", 4 = "On the road with bike/on foot", 5 = "Working in the office/from home", 6 = "Working outdoors (including lunch break outdoors), 7 = "Free time outdoors (e.g.garden/park etc.), 8 = "Other: please specify (e.g.sport)".To ensure that participants complete this task, they send a picture of the completed form every night and upload it to a shared folder (separate for each participant) where the experimenter could check compliance.Furthermore, they are asked to rate the confidence in their answers ("How sure are you about the light exposure and activity categories you chose?") on MyCap, where they can answer using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = "Not confident at all" to 5 = "Completely confident".

Final day questionnaires
On their final day of the experiment, participants return the devices and filled in a series of questionnaires and open-ended questions on their phones, during an in-person visit to the laboratory.

Light Exposure Behaviour Assessment (LEBA)
The 22-item Light Exposure Behaviour Assessment (LEBA; (Siraji, Lazar, et al., 2023)) is used to retrospectively assess individuals' light behaviours during the experimental week.Since the first three items of this instrument ask questions related to wearing blue-filtering, orange-tinted and/or red-tinted glasses, which do not apply to our participants due to the presence of the light logger device, these items are eliminated.The final questionnaire thus comprises the remaining 19 items.These concern specific behaviours such as exposure to daylight, smartphone use, light-related bedtime habits and electric light use at home.Participants can express the frequency of such behaviours using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 = "Never" to 5 = "Always".
. Visual Light Sensitivity Questionnaire-8 (VLSQ-8) Participants complete the 8-point Visual Light Sensitivity Questionnaire-8 (VLSQ-8; (Verriotto et al., 2017)) to answer questions about their visual light sensitivity during the experimental week.The questions include aspects of frequency and severity of photosensitivity as well as impacts of photosensitivity on daily behaviours, and participants answer using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = "Never" to 5 = "Always").

Assessment of Sleep Environment (ASE) questionnaire
The 13-item Assessment of Sleep Environment (ASE) questionnaire is used to ask participants about aspects such as light, noise, temperature and humidity in their sleeping environment (Grandner et al., 2022), which might affect their sleeping quality as well as the light measured by the light logger placed next to participants during sleep (e.g., in case of light coming through windows during sleep).
Participants can express their agreement to each item using a 5-point Likert scale (1 = "Strongly agree" to 5 = "Strongly disagree").

Open-ended questions
To further probe the usability of our light logger, we present participants with the following open-ended questions: "Can you describe any challenges or discomfort you experienced while wearing the light glasses?How did you cope with them?", "In what situations did you notice the light glasses having the most impact on your daily activities or behaviour?","How did you adapt your behaviour, if at all, because of the light glasses?Please provide some examples.","Can you share any suggestions or improvements for the design or functionality of the light glasses (comprising the sensor and the glasses) for future experiments?","Please describe any situations or activities where the light glasses failed to capture your "typical" light exposure because you had to take them off?", and "How comfortable were the light glasses for you to wear during your daily activities?".

OPTIONAL: Environmental light logging
To measure the environmental light in the local site during each experimental week, one ActLumus light logger will optionally be placed on the rooftop of a chosen building.The set-up for these environmental light measurements consists of a black metal floor, where the device lies horizontally, covered by a plastic half-dome to minimise light scattering while ensuring protection from the elements (Figure 2).This set-up is placed on the rooftop before participants start the study every week and remain there for the entire week until participants discharge, measuring environmental light with a sampling interval of 30 seconds.Each day, a researcher will check and, if necessary, clean the outside and/or the inside of the set-up from dirt or rain.At the end of each experimental week, the data .from this environmental light logger will be downloaded, and the device will be charged before being placed back on the rooftop just before the next participants start the study on the same day.As not all sites can complete this measurement, this measurement is optional.

Protocol Study design
This experiment is an observational field study in which all participants will undergo the same experimental conditions and questionnaires.These are shown in Table 3.

Environment and context
The study will take place between 1 March 2024 and 31 March 2025.On the first and last day of the experiment, each volunteer will complete questionnaires at the local hub.During the field part of this study, in which the participants will be wearing the light logger, the environment and settings will depend on each participant, occupation, and activities.These include households, workplaces, and outdoor and public indoor spaces.
We will collect additional contextual data to keep track of the environmental and light conditions at each local hub.
• Where possible, a light logger covered by a protective plastic cover will optionally be placed on a rooftop without vertical obstructions/shading.This light logger will be checked regularly during weeks of experimental data collection to ensure it remains in good condition.
• When such measurements are impossible, secondary data sources, including historical weather data, sunshine duration, sunrise/sunset times, or existing radiation measurement infrastructure, will be used.

Screening
Screening for the current study will take place online using a screening questionnaire.The criteria of inclusion/exclusion are based on self-reported answers provided by the participants in this online questionnaire.This screening survey will be available online from March 2024 onwards so that participant enrollment in the study will remain open during the months of data collection.

Procedure
A schematic representation of the experimental procedure is illustrated in Figure 1.Eligible participants will start the experiment on a Monday with an in-person visit to the office or laboratory of .resampled dataset, significance was tested in a mixed-effect model (fixed effect: season, random effect: participants) with a significance level of 0.05.The fraction of significant differences were compared against the power level threshold of 0.8.The required sample size is the minimum sample size that reaches this threshold, with 1000 resamples per sample size (sample sizes from 3 to 50 were tested).A total of twelve metrics were analyzed: • Geometric mean of melanopic EDI (lx) • Geometric standard deviation of melanopic EDI (lx) • Luminous exposure (lx\*h) • Time above 250 lux (h) • Time above 1000 lux (h) • Mean timing of light above 250 lux (h) • Mean timing of light below 10 lux (h)

• Intradaily variability
• Mean across the darkest (L5) hours (lx) • Midpoint of the darkest (L5) hours (lx) • Mean across brightest (M10) hours (lx) • Midpoint of the brightest (M10) hours (lx) Three metrics had no effect in the historical dataset and thus did not reach the power threshold (Geometric standard deviation, mean timing of light above 250 lux, midpoint of darkest 5 hours).With a sample size of 15 participants, eight out of nine metrics showed sufficient power (intradaily variability: 21 participants to threshold power).Even considering a high dropout rate of 33% leaves seven out of nine metrics sufficiently powered (mean of darkest 5 hours: 15 participants to threshold power).

Pre-processing
Objectively measured light exposure data will be log-transformed (base 10) to account for large light level differences, such as indoor and outdoor light exposure.
Data from the light logger will be processed to separate non-wear time from wear time.This will be possible through information from three sources: • Wear log completed by the participant; • Button presses done by the participant; • Light exposure recordings while in a black bag (expected to drop to near 0 during non-wear time).
. exposure categories and hourly median objective light exposure.a. Preparation: Hourly entry on light sources from daily modified H-LEA will serve as categorical variables.In the case of two light sources for a given hour, only the primary light source will be considered (as reported by participants).The median melanopic equivalent daylight illuminance (melanopic equivalent daylight illuminance; mEDI) as measured objectively by the light logger for the corresponding hour will be calculated.b.Analysis: mel EDI is used as the dependent variable, and H-LEA as the fixed effect, participants within each geolocation as random effect.Participant's geolocation, sex, age, occupational status and chronotype (MCTQ) are added as covariates.The dependency of mel EDI and H-LEA as well as the weekday is allowed to vary between participants within a geolocation.The resulting formula is as follows: b.Analysis: Spearman's rank correlation coefficient between MSF sc and 6-day average MLiT 250 lx mEDI for each participant.Additional models with various ring-fenced covariates will be built in future steps.
3. H3: We hypothesize that there is a significant difference between daily average objective light exposure and geographical location, and additionally, that the differences in photoperiod explain a substantial part of that relationship a. Preparation: calculate the daily mel EDI light dose (in lx*h) as measured objectively by the light logger for the corresponding day.Calculate also the photoperiod of that day for a given location as the time from sunrise until sunset (sun elevation equal to zero), as calculated by the sun angles given from the oce R package (https://dankelley.github.io/oce/).
b. Analysis: daily mel EDI light dose (in lx*h)is the dependent continuous variable.
Geolocation is the independent categorical variable.A second step also includes photoperiod.Weekday, sex, age, and chronotype are covariates.Participant ID within geolocation is a random effect, as is the weekday effect for each participant.The full formula is as follows: . ‫ܧ‬ሺLight Doseሻ ൌ geolocation photoperiod weekday sex age chronotype ሺ1 weekday| geolocation:participantሻ (2)     Exploratory analyses We plan to explore several relationships regarding behavioural and self-reported data.These are listed here for transparency.
1. Light exposure 1.1.Relationship between metrics of light exposure that describe light properties (melanopic EDI and photopic illuminance) and between metrics describing the temporal pattern of light exposure, including light regularity index (LRI), intraday variability (IV), interday stability (IS).
1.2.Comparison between objectively measured light exposure during weekdays and weekends.
1.3.Relationship between retrospective light exposure items as measured by the LEBA instrument and objective light exposure.
1.4.Relationship between environmental conditions during the experimental week (e.g.photoperiod availability, sunlight hours and temperature) and objective light exposure.
1.5.Relationship between light exposure measured and mood and alertness ratings measured throughout the day.
1.6.Relationship between subjective light sensitivity as reported by the VLSQ-8 and objective light exposure.
1.7.Relationship between daily objective light exposure and wellbeing scores as measured by the WHO-5 questionnaire.
1.8.Relationship between exercise frequency and type as measured by the exercise log and objective light exposure.
1.9.Relationship between geolocation, photoperiod and other metrics of light exposure (see 1.1), also in interaction with the weekday.
Descriptive analysis of open-ended questions on wearing the light logger.
2.2.Relationship between negative and positive experiences as reported in the experience log and non-wear time as reported in the wear log. .

Data storage and privacy
Data collected through REDCap and MyCap will be pseudonymized in the system and stored on this system until the end of data analysis.Anonymised data will be made publicly available after the publication of the primary research publication.

Outcomes Primary outcome measures
To answer our confirmatory research questions, our primary outcome measures are the following: 1. Daily light exposure (examined in H1 & H3) 2. Chronotype (examined in H2)

Secondary outcome measures
Our secondary outcome measures will be described using descriptive statistics.These will include: •

Other measurements
Additional measurements will include the demographic characteristics of the participants provided during screening.

Translation and adaptation of questionnaires
To run the study in our five sites, translation of surveys and questionnaires is required.To this end, a team-based, multi-step process will be employed to achieve this goal, involving a diverse group of individuals, including trained translators and experts in the survey's subject matter (based on the "TRAPD" approach to translate questionnaires).The source language is English and the target languages are German (Germany), Dutch (Netherlands), Swedish (Sweden), Spanish (Spain) and Turkish (Turkey).We will use the following strategy: Team approach: • Assemble a translation team of individuals from diverse backgrounds, bringing together interdisciplinary expertise.
• Ensure that the team consists of at least three independent members (two acting as translators and one as a reviewer/adjudicator).
Translator selection: • Ideally, choose two translators with experience (and some training) in translating surveys/questionnaires.
• The translators should have proficiency in both the source language (the language of the original questionnaire) and the target language (the language into which the questionnaire will be translated).Ideally the translators translate into their mother tongue.
• Ideally at least one of the two translators is a trained and/or professional translator.

First project meeting:
• Discuss potential future challenges translating the questionnaires and surveys and flag items that may be difficult (source questionnaire).

Initial parallel translations:
• Begin the translation process with two parallel translations of the source instrument into the target language (by the two translators mentioned above).The two translators should not contact each other while translating, but delivers independent translations.

Review discussion and adjucation
• In a "Review" discussion, all items of the questionnaire should be discussed at least by the three persons of the translation team, possibly more: compare and discuss the two initial translations and try to agree on one translation: this may be one of the two initial translations, a blend of both .
or a completely new translation, developed during the discussion.
• A "Reviewer" should chair the session.This should be an expert in the matter with good proficiency in both English and the target language.
• Include an adjudicator with expert knowledge in the subject matter to resolve any discrepancies or ambiguities in the translations.This may be the third person in the translation team, the "Reviewer" (then called "Reviewer-cum-Adjudicator"), or an additional, 4th person.If the adjudicator is a 4th person, he/she may participate in the Review meeting, or be consulted after the meeting.
• The translators should be present during this session to answer any language-related questions, clarify, and bring in the translation perspective.
Pre-test of the translation: • Conduct a cognitive pretesting (n≈10) of the translated questionnaire to assess its comprehensibility and cultural appropriateness.
• This pretest should involve a sample of the target population who will eventually complete the translated questionnaire.
• Based on the pretest results, consider making necessary adjustments to the translated questionnaire to improve its clarity and cultural relevance.
• If significant issues arise, conducting further cognitive pretesting iterations is advisable.
• In case the cognitive pretests reveal weaknesses of the source questionnaire, please report back to the central team.

Final Review:
• Review and finalise the translated questionnaire based on the feedback and insights gained from the run-through and cognitive pretesting.

Quality Assurance:
• Maintain a comprehensive documentation of the entire translation process, including all versions of the questionnaire, meeting notes, and participant feedback.
• Ensure that the final translated questionnaire is linguistically accurate, culturally appropriate, and equivalent in meaning to the source instrument.

Code, data and materials availability
Upon conclusion of the primary analyses, the data will be made available under the Creative Commons license (CC-BY) with no reservations in the supplementary material of the research publication and/or on a public repository (e.g., FigShare). .

•
Environmental conditions as measured by the light logger placed on the roof.• Participants' experience wearing the light logger: o Open-ended questions o Experience log .

Table 1 :
Selection of prior literature.Note: In the assessment of sex/gender proportions, no 734differences were made.