MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1555600854 · doi:10.1093/sleep/27.8.1567

Derivation of Research Diagnostic Criteria for Insomnia: Report of an American Academy of Sleep Medicine Work Group

2004· review· en· W1555600854 on OpenAlexaff
Jack D. Edinger, Michael H. Bonnet, Richard R. Bootzin, Karl Doghramji, Cynthia M. Dorsey, Colin A. Espie, Andrew O. Jamieson, W. Vaughn McCall, Charles M. Morin, Edward J. Stepanski

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaSituational ethicsPsychologySleep medicineSleep disorderPsychiatryClinical psychologyMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insomnia is a highly prevalent, often debilitating, and economically burdensome form of sleep disturbance caused by various situational, medical, emotional, environmental and behavioral factors. Although several consensually-derived nosologies have described numerous insomnia phenotypes, research concerning these phenotypes has been greatly hampered by a lack of widely accepted operational research diagnostic criteria (RDC) for their definition. The lack of RDC has, in turn, led to inconsistent research findings for most phenotypes largely due to the variable definitions used for their ascertainment. Given this problem, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) commissioned a Work Group (WG) to review the literature and identify those insomnia phenotypes that appear most valid and tenable. In addition, this WG was asked to derive standardized RDC for these phenotypes and recommend assessment procedures for their ascertainment. This report outlines the WG's findings, the insomnia RDC derived, and research assessment procedures the WG recommends for identifying study participants who meet these RDC.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1,044
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207