Sleep Habits and Fatigue of Children Receiving Maintenance Chemotherapy for ALL and Their Parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of potential contributors to fatigue, such as sleep disturbance, has been identified as a research priority in pediatric cancer. The primary objective of this descriptive study was to explore relationships between sleep habits, sleep disturbance, and fatigue for children receiving maintenance chemotherapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). This study also described sleep habits, sleep disturbance, and fatigue of parents of children and adolescents with ALL and determined if relationships existed between parent and child sleep disturbance and fatigue. Using a descriptive, cross-sectional design, children aged 4-18 years receiving maintenance chemotherapy for ALL and their parents completed questionnaires about their sleep and fatigue. Sleep disturbance was common in both children (87%) and parents (48%) and sleep disturbance scores were positively correlated with fatigue scores. From qualitative written responses to open-ended questions, 9 themes emerged related to sleep for children undergoing maintenance chemotherapy for ALL. Sleep differences noted since diagnosis included (1) sleep is disturbed, (2) sleep habits have changed, and (3) sleep is unchanged or improved. Things that got in the way of children sleeping well included (4) side effects of medication, especially dexamethasone; and (5) medication schedules. Things that helped children get sleep at night were (6) sleeping with someone, (7) comforting activities or routine, (8) medications, and (9) food and drink. Sleep disturbance in children on ALL maintenance and their parents is common and likely contributes to increased fatigue and is a potential target for nursing interventions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".