MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045387290 · doi:10.1080/15402000903425314

A Computer Device to Deliver Behavioral Interventions for Insomnia

2009· article· en· W2045387290 on OpenAlex
William T. Riley, Patricia Mihm, Albert Behar, Charles M. Morin

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavioral Sleep Medicine · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsInsomniaPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexStimulus controlChronic insomniaSleep restrictionPsychological interventionExploratory researchPhysical therapyMedicineSleep qualityPsychologySleep disorderPsychiatrySleep deprivationCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An automated program for delivering stimulus control and sleep restriction strategies was developed and implemented on a handheld computer and compared to a self-help manual program in 90 chronic primary insomnia participants at 6 and 12 weeks. The computerized program was generally well accepted and utilized. No significant differences between conditions were found on questionnaire and sleep diary measures, but subsequent exploratory analyses revealed greater percentages of participants in the computer condition compared to the self-help condition who were classified as without clinically significant insomnia at 6 weeks based on Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) criteria. Further research is needed on the efficacy of computerized behavioral approaches for insomnia, but the results of this study indicate that computerized delivery of stimulus control and sleep restriction is feasible and sufficiently promising to warrant further study.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.335 · 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