Sleep problems in young infants and maternal mental and physical health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Sleep problems in the second 6 months of life are common and associated with maternal depression. This paper extends previous research to (i) establish the prevalence of sleep problems in younger infants from a broader socio-economic spectrum, (ii) examine the relationship between infant sleep problems and maternal physical, as well as mental, health, and (iii) explore mothers' sleep quality as a potential mediator of this relationship. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, community survey in Melbourne, Australia. SAMPLE: Mothers of 3- to 6-month-old infants (mean 4.6 months) recruited from well-child clinics in six sociodemographically diverse metropolitan local government areas. OUTCOME MEASURES: Maternal mental and physical health; standardised questionnaire on infant sleep patterns; maternal report of an infant sleep problem (yes/no). RESULTS: The survey was completed by 692 mothers; 237 (34%) reported an infant sleep problem, of whom 73 (31%) rated the problem as severe. Sleep patterns characterising a problem included the infant waking seven nights per week, nursing the infant to sleep at the beginning of the night, the infant sleeping in the parent's room, and parental disagreement regarding managing infant sleep. There was no relationship between sleep problems and socio-economic levels. Mothers reporting infant sleep problems had poorer mental and physical health compared with those not reporting sleep problems. CONCLUSION: Sleep problems are common in early infancy across metropolitan socio-economic levels and are associated with poorer maternal health and well-being. Preventive strategies for infant sleep problems need to begin early in primary care to improve mothers' health.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".