MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078422893 · doi:10.1207/s15402010bsm0103_3

Role of Nocturnal Cognitive Arousal in the Complaint of Insomnia Among Older Adults

2003· article· en· W2078422893 on OpenAlex
Iris Alapin, Eva Libman, Sally Bailes, Catherine S. Fichten

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 · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityConcordia UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaArousalCognitionPsychologySleep (system call)NocturnalClinical psychologyLow arousal theoryEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceAssociation (psychology)PsychiatryMedicinePsychotherapistInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-reported cognitive activity has been hypothesized to contribute directly to problematic sleep. We evaluated this formulation by examining nocturnal sleep parameters, daytime functioning and psychological adjustment cross-sectionally (N = 183) in four groups of older adults: good and poor sleepers with high and low cognitive arousal. Results indicate that when sleep quality was controlled for, individuals with high and low nocturnal cognitive arousal did not differ on either nocturnal or daytime aspects of the insomnia complaint. They were, however, less well adjusted psychologically. The pattern of findings suggests that high cognitive arousal contributes indirectly to the overall insomnia experience through its association with psychological maladjustment, rather than interfering with sleep per se. Treatment of late-life insomnia should include assessment and, possibly, clinical management of psychological adjustment.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.294 · 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