Adverse Associations of Sleep Problems in Australian Preschoolers: National Population Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In contrast to school-aged children, the impact of sleep problems in preschool-aged children is not well documented. We aimed to determine relationships between preschool-aged child sleep problems and child behavior; health-related quality of life; verbal, preliteracy, and early numeracy skills; diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; and injury. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Participants included families (n = 4983) participating in the first wave of the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children, a nationally representative study of Australian children aged 4 to 5 years surveyed from March to November 2004. Measures consisted of a primary caregiver's report of whether their child had a sleep problem (none versus mild versus moderate/severe); specific sleep patterns occurring > or = 4 nights per week; health-related quality of life (by using the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory 4.0); behavior (by using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire) and parent-reported diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder; and injury requiring medical attention in the past 12 months. Tests of receptive vocabulary and preliteracy/numeracy skills (by using the Who Am I? developmental assessment and the adapted Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, 3rd Edition) were directly administered to each child. RESULTS: Sleep problems were common, and compared with children without sleep problems, children with sleep problems had poorer child health-related quality of life, more behavior problems, and higher rates of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Difficulty going to sleep and morning tiredness had greater adverse associations than snoring or night waking. CONCLUSIONS: Given that sleep problems are very common, the adverse outcomes shown here could affect the transition to school for a very large number of preschoolers.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".