Infant respiration is a physiological marker of health and wellbeing that can provide insight into sleep and wake patterns. Technological innovation presents opportunities to enhance measurements of physiological signals, which improves ecological validity and participant experiences. This is particularly true in the context of studying infant sleep, as it can be disrupted by changes in the environment and the physical sensation of unfamiliar or uncomfortable sensors. The goal of this study was to examine if a commercially available video baby monitor (Nanit system) can accurately estimate respiration during a nap relative to a commonly used cardiorespiratory sensor (Isansys Lifetouch sensor). Thirty-three infants (M = 9.7 months; range = 1–22 months) took a nap while wearing the Lifetouch sensor and Nanit Breathing Band. Infants slept in view of the Nanit camera. A computer vision algorithm applied to the video detected movement of the patterns on the fabric band worn around the infant’s torso to determine respiratory rates. The results showed strong consistency between the devices. More than 95% of the minute-by-minute respiration data fell within the limits of agreement, with little bias. Agreement was not influenced by age or nap duration, suggesting the Nanit Breathing Band provides a valid measure of respiration across infancy.

Background and Objective Bedtime procrastination (BP) has emerged as an important sleep behavior linked to poor sleep health. While parental sleep deprivation has traditionally been attributed to external caregiving demands, the role of voluntary behaviors, such as BP, that contribute to insufficient sleep has been understudied. This study aimed to characterize BP in parents and examine multiple contributing factors, including parenting demands.Methods Two independent samples were analyzed. Study 1 characterized parental BP using daily sleep diary from 94 South Korean parents with children aged 6–24 months. Study 2 analyzed online survey data from 483 parents with children aged 0–25 months in the United States. Participants were classified into high and low BP groups based on a cutoff score of 33 on the Bedtime Procrastination Scale in Study 2. Group differences were compared, and predictors of parental BP were identified using the CatBoost model.Results In Study 1, parents reported BP on 78.6% of nights, with delays exceeding 40 minutes observed in 61.5% of BP nights. In Study 2, the CatBoost model demonstrated a good discriminative performance (area under the curve=0.805). Later child light off time, higher smartphone addiction, lower perceived reward, and greater unmet leisure time needs were identified as important predictors of greater BP.Conclusions Parental BP was a common behavior, occurring on the majority of recorded nights. Insufficient parental sleep may be partly driven by modifiable behavioral factors, including BP, rather than caregiving demands alone. Addressing BP may offer a practical behavioral intervention to improve parental sleep health.