MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084471229 · doi:10.2466/pms.107.3.691-706

A New Scale for Measuring Insomnia: The Bergen Insomnia Scale

2008· article· en· W2084471229 on OpenAlexaff
Ståle Pallesen, Bjørn Bjorvatn, Inger Hilde Nordhus, Børge Sivertsen, Mari Hjørnevik, Charles M. Morin

Bibliographic record

VenuePerceptual and Motor Skills · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaPsychologyCronbach's alphaScale (ratio)Clinical psychologyMorningPsychiatryPsychometricsMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new scale for the measurement of insomnia, the Bergen Insomnia Scale, was constructed on the basis of current formal and clinical diagnostic criteria for insomnia. There are six items, of which the first three pertain to sleep onset, maintenance, and early morning wakening insomnia, respectively. The last three items refer to not feeling adequately rested, experiencing daytime impairment, and being dissatisfied with current sleep. This scale was validated in three samples, 320 students, 2645 community persons, and 225 patients. Cronbach alphas in the three samples were .79, .87, and .80, respectively. The 2-wk. test-retest reliability for students was .77. In the student and the patient samples, a two-factor solution was found, nocturnal symptoms and daytime symptoms, but in the community sample, a one-factor solution was found. The Bergen Insomnia Scale discriminated well between the patient sample and the other two. In all three, values of convergent and discriminative validity in relation to other self-report measures were good, as well as in relation to polysomnographic data for patients. It is concluded that the Bergen Insomnia Scale has good psychometric properties. It is one of very few insomnia scales which provide normative data for comparisons and which has been validated against subjective as well as polysomnographic data.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations421
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerceptual and Motor SkillsSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207