The Relationship between Sensory Processing Patterns and Sleep Quality in Healthy Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sleep quality affects a person's performance and quality of life. Poor sleep was recently associated with hyperarousability and difficulties in processing sensory input. PURPOSE: To examine the relationships between sensory-processing difficulties (SPD) and sleep quality in healthy adults. METHODS: The 185 participants, aged 21 to 60 (mean 33.64 +/- 8.69), completed the Adolescent/Adult Sensory Profile (AASP) and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). FINDINGS: Sleep quality significantly correlated with sensory-processing patterns characterized by hypersensitivity. These patterns were manifested in specific modalities (tactile, visual, and auditory), which significantly predicted sleep quality. IMPLICATIONS: Sleep quality may be related to predisposing, sensory-processing patterns, particularly to hypersensitivity. Occupational therapists should refer to the possible relationship between SPD and sleep quality when treating individuals with SPD or poor sleepers. This may assist in implementing the optimal intervention based on the person's specific needs and contribute to performance and quality of life.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".