Alertness, mood and performance rhythm disturbances associated with circadian sleep disorders in the blind
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Blind people report disturbances in alertness, mood and performance. In laboratory studies, these waking functions can only be maintained when the wake-dependent deterioration is opposed by appropriately-timed endogenous circadian rhythms. We aimed to quantify whether variations in waking function experienced by blind people living in society were dependent on the phase relationship between the sleep-wake cycle and the circadian pacemaker. The time course of alertness, mood and performance was assessed in 52 blind subjects with and without circadian rhythm disorders every 2 h for 2 days per week for 4 weeks. Sleep-wake timing and circadian phase were assessed from diaries and weekly measurements of urinary 6-sulphatoxymelatonin rhythms, respectively. In those subjects who woke at either a normal circadian phase (n = 26) or abnormally early (n = 5), alertness, mood and performance deteriorated significantly with increased time awake (P < 0.05). In 17 non-entrained ('free-running') subjects, waking function varied significantly with circadian phase such that subjects rated themselves most sleepy (P = 0.03) and most miserable (P = 0.02) when they were awake during the time of peak melatonin production. The internal phase relationship between sleep-wake behaviour and the circadian melatonin rhythm in entrained subjects contributed to predictable differences in the daily profile of alertness, mood and performance. Disruption of this phase relationship in non-entrained blind individuals with circadian rhythm sleep disorders resulted in impaired waking function during the day equivalent to that usually only experienced when awake during the night. Treatment for circadian rhythm disorders should be targeted in normalizing these phase relationships.
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".