In addition to documentary analysis, we undertook 23 focus groups (99 participants) with the following: those who might be expected to have particular views about sleep or wakefulness promoting medicines (narcolepsy patients, primary care patients taking hypnotics, sleep apnoea patients), and general populations groups (academics, ambulance service staff, lawyers, parents of young children, sheltered housing residents, university students). We interviewed 7 general practitioners working in the UK and 9 'experts' (sleep clinicians, psycho-pharmacologists, representatives from patient and/or pressure groups, academics with a specialist interest in sleep/wakefulness promoting medications). Observation notes on each focus group/interview are included in the dataset.Concerns are frequently expressed in scientific, professional and popular culture about the personal and social costs and consequences of poor sleep. At the same time concerns are being voiced about the 'appropriate' role and use of pharmaceuticals in the management of sleep problems, both inside and outside the doctors' surgery and the sleep clinic. This project provides a timely and topical social scientific investigation of these developments and debates. It focuses on sleep and wakefulness promoting drugs in contemporary Britain since 2000, framed in terms of the role of pharmaceuticals in the medical, social and personal management of sleep problems. The project examines both 'upstream' issues regarding the development and regulation of sleep and wakefulness promoting drugs and 'downstream' issues regarding their meaning and use in medical practice and everyday/night life. These issues were investigated through a qualitative, multi-method study comprising documentary sources, semi-structured interviews, focus groups and detailed case-studies with key stakeholders in field - ranging from sleep scientists, doctors and policymakers to patients, pressure groups and other key members of the public with an interest in these matters. Results are being communicated and disseminated to both academic and non-academic audiences and user groups, including scientists, doctors, patients, pressure groups and policymakers.

This was a multi-method and multi-site qualitative study which included documentary research, 16 semi-structured interviews, and 23 focus groups with key stakeholders.