MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002108541 · doi:10.1017/s0317167100009896

Current Evaluation and Management of Excessive Daytime Sleepiness

2010· review· en· W2002108541 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mark I. Boulos, Brian J. Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarcolepsyExcessive daytime sleepinessModafinilMedicineSleep deprivationSleep disorderPsychiatryPsychologyIntensive care medicineInsomniaCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Excessive daytime sleepiness has significant impact on neurological function, and has societal implications. Sleepiness is a common feature of many neurological conditions. A careful history will often reveal one of many common causes of excessive daytime sleepiness and suggest appropriate treatment. Neurophysiological testing can provide objective assessment. Behavioural management is an important first step in management. Treatment of common concurrent sleep disorders is also essential. Currently available medications can further symptomatically improve function in many individuals. The strongest evidence base is for the treatment of narcolepsy--a prototype disorder of excessive daytime sleepiness. Currently used medications include modafinil, stimulants, and sodium oxybate amongst others. This review discusses important features in the diagnosis of daytime sleepiness in adults, and outlines a treatment approach. Further evidence-based information about the management of this common problem is essential.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.011
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.400
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations41
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences NeurologiquesSame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207