Sleep complaints in patients with myotonic dystrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to document the clinical picture of excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) and of other sleep disturbances, and to study the relationship of daytime sleepiness to anthropometric data, muscular impairment, and CTG trinucleotide repeat expansion in myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1). A total of 157 DM1 patients were surveyed using a modified version of the Sleep Questionnaire and Assessment of Wakefulness. Other measurements included muscular impairment rating and the size of the trinucleotide repeat. Factor analysis and reliability estimates were used to produce a daytime sleepiness scale with five items of the questionnaire. Thirty-eight healthy family members were studied as control subjects. It was found that EDS was present in 33.1% of DM1 patients. Severity of daytime sleepiness correlated with the degree of muscular impairment but not with age, gender, body mass index, age at onset of symptoms, duration of illness, and CTG repeat. DM1 patients reported a longer sleep period, a less restorative sleep, and more difficulty falling asleep, being alert in the morning and staying awake after meals than controls, but a similar incidence of narcolepsy auxiliary symptoms. Compared with DM1 patients without EDS, those with EDS reported greater hypnagogic hallucinations, and greater pain associated with nocturnal awakenings and in their legs upon morning awakenings. In sum, both DM1 patients with and without EDS exhibit characteristics of sleep duration and sleepiness comparable with those found in idiopathic hypersomnia. The severity of daytime sleepiness is weakly related to the extent of muscular impairment but not to CTG repeat.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".