MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998910980 · doi:10.1080/j006v26n03_05

Sleep Issues in Children with Physical Disabilities and Their Families

2006· article· en· W1998910980 on OpenAlexaff
Marilyn Wright, Annamaria Tancredi, Betty Yundt, Hélène Larin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In Pediatrics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrritabilitySleep (system call)PsychologySleep hygieneSleep disorderClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryInsomniaAnxietySleep quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sleep has a significant impact on the daily functioning of children and their parents. The purpose of this study was to describe the sleep patterns, issues, and strategies used to facilitate sleep in children with and without physical disabilities and their families. Data were collected from questionnaires completed by caregivers and siblings. Caregivers of children with physical disabilities reported significantly greater concerns regarding general sleep problems, safety, and discomfort at night, night wakening, daytime irritability, interference with daytime activities and sleep-related health concerns in children with physical disabilities than in their counterparts. Caregivers, but not siblings, in families of children with physical disabilities experienced an increased prevalence of sleep issues. The most frequently cited strategies to alleviate problems were the establishment of consistent routines and provision of calming, supportive sleep environments. Pediatric therapists need to assess and address sleep issues to promote the well-being of children and their families.

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)0.003
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations51
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In PediatricsSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207