Sleep education in pediatric residency programs: a cross-cultural look
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of education about sleep and sleep disorders in pediatric residency programs and to identify barriers to providing such education. METHODS: Surveys were completed by directors of 152 pediatric residency programs across 10 countries (Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, United States-Canada, and Vietnam). RESULTS: Overall, the average amount of time spent on sleep education is 4.4 hours (median = 2.0 hours), with 23% responding that their pediatric residency program provides no sleep education. Almost all programs (94.8%) offer less than 10 hours of instruction. The predominant topics covered include sleep-related development, as well as normal sleep, sleep-related breathing disorders, parasomnias, and behavioral insomnia of childhood. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that there is still a need for more efforts to include sleep-related education in all pediatric residency programs, as well as coverage of the breadth of sleep-related topics. Such education would be consistent with the increased recognition of the importance of sleep and under-diagnosis of sleep disorders in children and adolescents.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".