MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W12015335

Impact of melatonin, zaleplon, zopiclone, and temazepam on psychomotor performance.

2003· article· en· W12015335 on OpenAlexaff
Michel A Paul, Gary Gray, Gord Kenny, Ross Pigeau

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZopicloneTemazepamHypnoticAnesthesiaMelatoninPsychomotor learningPsychologyMedicinePsychiatryInternal medicineBenzodiazepine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Modern military operations may require pharmaceutical methods to sustain alertness and facilitate sleep in order to maintain operational readiness. In operations with very limited sleep windows, hypnotics with very short half-lives (e.g., zaleplon, t(1/2) 1 h) are of interest, while with longer sleep opportunities, longer acting agents (e.g., zopiclone, temazepam (t(1/2) 4-6 hours) may be used. This study was designed to compare the effect of a single dose of zaleplon, zopiclone, temazepam, and melatonin on psychomotor performance and to quantify the post-ingestion time required for return to normal performance. METHOD: There were 23 subjects (9 men, 14 women), 21-53 yr of age, assessed for psychomotor performance on 2 test batteries (4 tasks) that included a sleepiness questionnaire. Psychomotor testing was conducted prior to, and for 7 h after, ingestion of a single dose of each of placebo, zaleplon 10 mg, zopiclone 7.5 mg, temazepam 15 mg, and time-released melatonin 6 mg. The experimental design was a double-blind cross-over with counter-balanced treatment order. RESULTS: Zaleplon, zopiclone, and temazepam impaired performance on all four tasks: serial reaction time (SRT), logical reasoning (LRT), serial subtraction (SST), and multitask (MT). Melatonin did not impair performance on any task. The time to recovery of normal performance for SRT during the zaleplon, zopiclone and temazepam conditions were 3.25, 6.25, and 5.25 h respectively; for LRT were 3.25, >6.25, and 4.25 h; for SST were 2.25, >6.25, and 4.25 h, and for MT were 2.25, 4.25, and 3.25 h. The recovery time to baseline subjective sleepiness levels for zaleplon, zopiclone, temazepam, and melatonin were 4.25, >6.25, 5.25, and >4.25 h, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of a prolonged period of perceived sleepiness, melatonin was superior to zaleplon in causing no impact on performance. The remaining drugs listed in increasing order of performance impact duration are zaleplon, temazepam, and zopiclone.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations71
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207