Development and Validation of the Nonrestorative Sleep Scale (NRSS)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Nonrestorative sleep (NRS) is defined as the subjective feeling that sleep has been insufficiently refreshing, often despite the appearance of physiologically normal sleep. While NRS has been shown to be associated with a variety of cognitive, affective, and medical complaints, there is currently no valid, reliable instrument available in the public domain for its assessment. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate the nonrestorative sleep scale (NRSS). PARTICIPANTS: The scale was administered to a sample of 226 (age: 46.7 ± 14.9 years; gender: 48% female) consecutive sleep clinic patients and to 30 control participants (age: 36.9 ± 12.5; gender: 53% female). RESULTS: Data screening led to a final instrument of 12 items, and factor analysis resulted in 4 factors accounting for 73.2% of total variance. The scale demonstrated excellent internal reliability (α = 0.88) and good test-retest reliability (r = 0.72). Preliminary evaluations of construct validity found that certain subscales correlated reasonably well with previously validated sleep, alertness, and affective scales. Comparisons between global NRSS scores and objective polysomnographic variables revealed a few very small but significant correlations. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these findings, the NRSS was confirmed to be a valid and reliable tool for the assessment of nonrestorative sleep.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".