Sensory Processing and Sleep in Typically Developing Infants and Toddlers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the relationship between sensory processing patterns and sleep problems in typically developing infants and toddlers. METHOD: A retrospective chart review of 177 infants and toddlers from a community occupational therapy sleep clinic included descriptive and correlational analyses of data from the Infant/Toddler Sensory Profile and Brief Infant Sleep Questionnaire. RESULTS: More than half of participants (55%) demonstrated a pattern of increased sensory processing in one or more quadrants, with sensitivity being most common (36%). We found small but significant correlations between increased seeking and shorter daytime sleep duration (r=-.24, p=.002) and between increased sensitivity and longer time to settle to sleep (r=.27, p<.001). CONCLUSION: This study adds to recent literature linking sensory processing patterns to sleep problems and is the first to demonstrate this relationship in young, typically developing children. Results support the role of occupational therapy in addressing sleep difficulties in children.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".