MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Age‐related modifications of NREM sleep EEG: from childhood to middle age

2001· article· en· W2040222347 on OpenAlexafffund
Hélène Gaudreau, Julie Carrier, J. Montplaisir

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sleep Research · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire en santé mentale de MontréalUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
FundersMedical Research Council Canada
KeywordsNon-rapid eye movement sleepElectroencephalographyAudiologyK-complexSleep (system call)PsychologyMiddle ageSlow-wave sleepYoung adultAge groupsDevelopmental psychologyMedicineDemographyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the modifications in non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep electroencephalogram (EEG) power in 54 subjects, from children to middle-aged adults. Spectral analyses were performed on 5 h of NREM sleep. A marked decrease of absolute slow-wave activity (SWA) was observed with increasing age; children had significantly more SWA than adolescents, young and middle-aged adults. The decline of SWA across the night seems to level off with increasing age, suggesting an age-related attenuation of homeostatic sleep pressure. Absolute theta power was higher for children compared with the other three groups, and adolescents had more theta power than young and middle-aged adults. In comparison to young and middle-aged adults, alpha power was higher for children and adolescents. Children and adolescents had more sigma power than middle-aged adults. Absolute beta power was higher for children than for the other age groups. Therefore, the major alterations of NREM sleep EEG occurring between childhood and middle age are not restricted to SWA, but encompassed the theta, alpha, sigma and beta frequency bands.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations207
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sleep ResearchSame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207