Light Treatment Improves Sleep Quality and Negative Affectiveness in High Arctic Residents During Winter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The seasonal extremes of photoperiod in the high Arctic place particular strain on the human circadian system, which leads to trouble sleeping and increased feelings of negative affect in the winter months. To qualify for our study, potential participants had to have been at Canadian Forces Station (CFS) Alert (82° 30' 00″ N) for at least 2 weeks. Subjects filled out questionnaires regarding sleep difficulty, psychological well-being and mood and wore Actigraphs to obtain objective sleep data. Saliva was collected at regular intervals on two occasions, 2 weeks apart, to measure melatonin and assess melatonin onset. Individuals with a melatonin rhythm that was in disaccord with their sleep schedule were given individualized daily light treatment interventions based on their pretreatment salivary melatonin profile. The light treatment prescribed to seven of the twelve subjects was effective in improving sleep quality both subjectively, based on questionnaire results, and objectively, based on the actigraphic data. The treatment also caused a significant reduction in negative affect among the participants. Since the treatment is noninvasive and has minimal associated side effects, our results support the use of the light visors at CFS Alert and other northern outposts during the winter for individuals who are experiencing sleep difficulty or low mood.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".