The Association of Sleep Disorder, Obesity Status, and Diabetes Mellitus among US Adults—The NHANES 2009-2010 Survey Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To examine the association between sleep disorders, obesity status, and the risk of diabetes in adults, a total of 3668 individuals aged 40+ years from the NHANES 2009-2010 without missing information on sleep-related questions, measurements related to diabetes, and BMI were included in this analysis. Subjects were categorized into three sleep groups based on two sleep questions: (a) no sleep problems; (b) sleep disturbance; and (c) sleep disorder. Diabetes was defined as having one of a diagnosis from a physician; an overnight fasting glucose > 125 mg/dL; Glycohemoglobin > 6.4%; or an oral glucose tolerance test > 199 mg/dL. Overall, 19% of subjects were diabetics, 37% were obese, and 32% had either sleep disturbance or sleep disorder. Using multiple logistic regression models adjusting for covariates without including BMI, the odds ratios (OR, (95% CI)) of diabetes were 1.40 (1.06, 1.84) and 2.04 (1.40, 2.95) for those with sleep disturbance and with sleep disorder, respectively. When further adjusting for BMI, the ORs were similar for those with sleep disturbance 1.36 (1.06, 1.73) but greatly attenuated for those with sleep disorders (1.38 [0.95, 2.00]). In conclusion, the impact of sleep disorders on diabetes may be explained through the individuals' obesity status.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".