MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1935421252 · doi:10.1111/pme.12894

Familial Contributions to Self-Reported Sleep and Pain in Female Twins

2015· article· en· W1935421252 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathryn M. Godfrey, Eric Strachan, Sheeva Mostoufi, Brian Poeschla, Annemarie Succop, Niloofar Afari

Bibliographic record

VenuePain Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexConfoundingVisual analogue scaleMcGill Pain QuestionnaireMedicineChronic painBonferroni correctionTwin studySleep (system call)Body mass indexSleep qualityMonozygotic twinFamily aggregationAssociation (psychology)Physical therapyClinical psychologyDemographyInternal medicinePsychologyPsychiatryInsomniaHeritabilityBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The relationship between sleep quality and pain has been studied in populations with chronic pain and in nonclinical populations using experimental paradigms. Little is known about the familial contributions to this relationship. This study examines self-reported sleep quality and pain in a nonclinical sample and to explore familial (i.e., shared genetic and common family environment) confounding in those relationships. DESIGN: Cross-sectional. SUBJECTS: Ninety nine community-based female twin pairs (N = 198) with a mean age of 29 years; 72% monozygotic. METHODS: The short form McGill Pain Questionnaire (McGill), a visual analog scale (VAS), a body map, and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) measured self-reported pain and sleep quality. Mixed model regression adjusted for age was used to examine relationships between the pain indices and PSQI in overall and within-pair models. RESULTS: Higher PSQI total scores were significantly associated with higher scores across the McGill sensory (B = 0.37, p < 0.001), affective (B = 0.16, p < 0.001), total scores (B = 0.54, p < 0.001), the VAS (B = 2.41, p < 0.001), and number of sites with any pain on the body map (B = 0.42, p = 0.001). All of these associations were diminished and rendered nonsignificant in within-pair analyses that accounted for genetic and familial factors (all p's ≥ 0.01; Bonferroni α = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support an association between poor sleep quality and pain and suggest that this relationship may be confounded by shared genetic and environmental factors, which could elucidate biological mechanisms that underlie the development and maintenance of pain and sleep problems.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePain MedicineSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207