MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968459014 · doi:10.1177/0748730406297780

Daily Light Exposure in Morning-Type and Evening-Type Individuals

2007· article· en· W1968459014 on OpenAlexaff
Geneviève Mignault Goulet, Valérie Mongrain, Catherine Desrosiers, Jean Paquet, Marie Dumont

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Rhythms · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCircadian rhythm and melatonin
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCircadian rhythmEveningMorningMelatoninRhythmBiologyPhysiologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Morning-type individuals (M-types) have earlier sleep schedules than do evening types (E-types) and therefore differ in their exposure to the external light-dark cycle. M-types and E-types usually differ in their endogenous circadian phase as well, but whether this is the cause or the consequence of the difference in light exposure remains controversial. In this study, ambulatory monitoring was used to measure 24-h light exposure in M-type and E-type subjects for 7 consecutive days. The circadian phase of each subject was then estimated in the laboratory using the dim-light melatonin onset in saliva (DLMO) and the core body temperature minimum (Tmin). On average, M-types had earlier sleep schedules and earlier circadian phases than E-types. They also showed more minutes of daily bright light exposure (> 1000 lux) than E-types. As expected, the 24-h patterns of light exposure analyzed in relation to clock time indicated that M-types were exposed to more light in the morning than E-types and that the reverse was true in the late evening. However, there was no significant difference when the light profiles were analyzed in relation to circadian phase, suggesting that, on average, the circadian pacemaker of both M-types and E-types was similarly entrained to the light-dark cycle they usually experience. Some M-types and E-types had different sleep schedules but similar circadian phases. These subjects also had identical light profiles in relation to their circadian phase. By contrast, M-types and E-types with very early or very late circadian phases showed large differences in their profiles of light exposure in relation to their circadian phase. This observation suggests that in these individuals, early or late circadian phases are related to relatively short and long circadian periods and that a phase-delaying profile of light exposure in M-types and a phase-advancing profile in E-types are necessary to ensure a stable entrainment to the 24-h day.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations114
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological RhythmsSame topicCircadian rhythm and melatoninFrench-language works237,207