This report compiles 32 at-home salivary assessments of Dim Light Melatonin Onset (DLMO) collected over four years from a single healthy adult male aged 38 to 42 with stable sleep–wake patterns. Ten assessments conducted under standardized dim-light conditions established a baseline. Within these baseline tests, DLMO timing was highly consistent, ranging from 7:13 PM to 8:43 PM with a standard deviation of 28 minutes. Peak salivary melatonin concentrations across baseline tests were also highly consistent (mean 13.26 pg/mL, SE = 0.46 pg/mL). These baseline results indicate strong intra-individual longitudinal stability of at-home salivary DLMO in this participant when dim-light protocols were observed.
The series included 21 assessments that introduced controlled contextual manipulations to evaluate how behavioral, environmental, and pharmacologic factors affect DLMO timing and melatonin profile morphology at the individual level. Manipulations included exogenous melatonin, ambient and bright-light exposures (including continuous ~1500 lux), blue-blocking glasses, diazepam, Escitalopram, magnesium supplementation, caffeine (300 mg), alcohol (6 oz of 80-proof), melatonin-rich foods, late-evening anaerobic exercise, and a behavioral delay of sleep–wake timing (5-hour delay for 10 days). One additional assessment compared seasonal photoperiod conditions. The goal was to quantify which factors meaningfully perturb DLMO estimation in real-world at-home testing.
Light exposure emerged as a high-impact contextual factor. Continuous bright light at approximately 1500 lux during the pre-onset interval suppressed melatonin production and obscured the ability to estimate central circadian phase from salivary measures. Bright light exposure after melatonin onset also produced steep declines in melatonin levels. By contrast, ambient or lower-intensity light exposures were not reported to cause the same degree of suppression in this individual. These findings underscore the critical need to control or document light conditions during at-home DLMO assessments because bright light can both blunt melatonin secretion and invalidate phase estimation.
Pharmacologic agents produced divergent effects in this N-of-1 series. Diazepam administered at 0.12 mg/kg per day over five days delayed melatonin timing and attenuated melatonin concentrations for this participant. By contrast, Escitalopram at 0.24 mg/kg per day over a 60-day period elevated baseline melatonin concentrations without an obvious change in the timing of melatonin onset at the evaluated dosage. Administration of exogenous melatonin (0.06 mg/kg) produced supraphysiologic salivary concentrations that precluded interpretation of underlying endogenous circadian phase during those assessments. These results illustrate that some medications can meaningfully alter either the amplitude or timing of salivary melatonin measures and therefore represent first-order threats to at-home DLMO validity in an individual.
Behavioral changes and common dietary supplements produced mixed effects in this participant. A prescribed behavioral delay—shifting bedtime 5 hours for 10 days—produced a corresponding delay in melatonin onset consistent with entrainment to the altered sleep–wake schedule. Short-term magnesium supplementation (5 days at 3.6 mg/kg per day), caffeine (300 mg), alcohol (6 oz of 80-proof), melatonin-rich foods, and intense anaerobic exercise during the DLMO assessment window produced negligible deviations in DLMO timing or peak concentrations for this individual. Blue-blocking glasses were included among contextual manipulations, though specific outcomes for those glasses were not detailed beyond the aggregate contrasts between high- and low-impact factors.
Within this single-subject, longitudinal dataset, the authors characterize contextual influences on at-home salivary DLMO as varying widely in magnitude. They distinguish higher-impact, first-order threats to measurement validity—such as continuous bright light exposure during the pre-onset interval, exogenous melatonin administration, and certain pharmacologic agents (example: diazepam in this series)—from lower-impact, second-order threats that appeared negligible in this participant (examples: short-term magnesium, single-dose caffeine, modest alcohol, melatonin-rich foods, and intense anaerobic exercise during the window tested).
These observations support the feasibility of repeated at-home DLMO assessments when dim-light protocols are followed, but they also emphasize careful control or documentation of specific environmental and pharmacologic exposures that can obscure or alter melatonin profiles. The report highlights the potential for individual variability in sensitivity to contextual factors and argues for attention to first-order threats when planning at-home circadian phase measurement and interpretation.
The dataset comprises 32 at-home salivary DLMO assessments across four years in a single healthy adult male. The preprint states that all relevant ethical guidelines were followed, institutional approvals were obtained (Western IRB, IRB Tracking # 20233850), and participant consent was secured. The authors note that all data produced in the work are contained within the manuscript. This report is a preprint and has not undergone peer review.
This study is an N-of-1 longitudinal series, so findings reflect outcomes in a single healthy adult and cannot be generalized without additional data. The preprint nature of the report means results have not been certified by external peer review. Specific outcomes for some contextual manipulations (for example, detailed effects of blue-blocking glasses) were not fully itemized in the source beyond the broader categorization of effects. The authors’ classification of first- versus second-order threats is based on the observed effect magnitudes within this participant; effect sizes and thresholds for clinical or research decision-making were not further generalized in the manuscript.
Overall, this series documents robust at-home DLMO stability under standardized dim-light conditions for one individual and identifies particular environmental and pharmacologic conditions that can markedly disrupt salivary melatonin profiles and phase estimation at the individual level.