Daytime Sleepiness and REM Sleep Characteristics in Myotonic Dystrophy: A Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) and high daytime REM sleep pressure are important sleep features of myotonic dystrophy (DM1). Small and uncontrolled studies have focused on EDS phenotype; none have focused on nocturnal REM sleep characteristics in DM1. Our objectives were to compare polysomnographic and multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) parameters, and both tonic and phasic components of REM sleep between DM1 and controls. DESIGN AND PATIENTS: Forty consecutive DM1 patients and 40 sex- and age-matched controls were included. All subjects underwent overnight polysomnography followed by a MSLT. RESULTS: About 80% of DM1 patients complained of EDS through clinical interview: 31.4% had Epworth scores > 10, and 12.5% had objective sleepiness (latency < 8 min). Higher apnea and central apnea indexes, and a greater proportion of subjects with severe apnea/hypopnea syndrome were found in DM1. The number of SOREMP differed between DM1 and controls, one and two SOREMPs being present in 47.5% and 32.5%, and one control had one SOREMP. Higher percentages of slow wave sleep and REM sleep were found in DM1. DM1 patients had significantly more PLMW, PLMS in both NREM and REM sleep, and PLMS-associated microarousals. Higher REM density was found in DM1 with similar tendencies for either REM sleep without atonia or phasic EMG activity. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first case-control sleep study in DM1 to demonstrate higher frequency of daytime sleepiness and abnormalities in REM sleep regulation, with an increased daytime and nighttime REM sleep propensity, REM density, and PLMS. These data suggest a primary central sleep regulation dysfunction in DM1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".