MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sleep bruxism and sleep arousal: an experimental challenge to assess the role of cyclic alternating pattern

2011· article· en· W1930990896 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oral Rehabilitation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPfizer
KeywordsSleep BruxismArousalSleep (system call)ElectroencephalographyAudiologyPsychologyPolysomnographyK-complexAnalysis of varianceSleep StagesElectromyographyNon-rapid eye movement sleepMedicineInternal medicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rhythmic masticatory muscle activity (RMMA) is the characteristic electromyographic pattern of sleep bruxism (SB), a sleep-related motor disorder associated with sleep arousal. Sleep arousals are generally organised in a clustered mode known as the cyclic alternating pattern (CAP). CAP is the expression of sleep instability between sleep maintaining processes (phase A1) and stronger arousal processes (phases A2 and A3). This study aimed to investigate the role of sleep instability on RMMA/SB occurrence by analysing CAP and electroencephalographic (EEG) activities. The analysis was performed on the sleep recordings of 8 SB subjects and 8 controls who received sensory stimulations during sleep. Baseline and experimental nights were compared for sleep variables, CAP, and EEG spectral analyses using repeated measure ANOVAs. Overall, no differences in sleep variables and EEG spectra were found between SB subjects and controls. However, SB subjects had higher sleep instability (more phase A3) than controls (P= 0·05). The frequency of phase A3 was higher in the pre-REM sleep periods (P < 0·001), where peaks in RMMA/SB activity were also observed (P = 0·05). When sleep instability was experimentally increased by sensory stimuli, both groups showed an enhancement in EEG theta and alpha power (P = 0·04 and 0·02, respectively) and significant increases in sleep arousal and all CAP variables. No change in RMMA/SB index was found within either groups (RMMA/SB occurred in all SB subjects and only one control during the experimental night). These findings suggest that CAP phase A3 may act as a permissive window rather than a generator of RMMA/SB activity in predisposed individuals.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.257 · 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