MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139530018 · doi:10.1177/1054773803012002004

The Sleep Experience of Medical and Surgical Patients

2003· article· en· W2139530018 on OpenAlexaff
Joan Tranmer, Janice P. Minard, Lee Ann Fox, L. Rebelo

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Nursing Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsKingston General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSleep (system call)MedicineSedativePsychological interventionSleep disorderPhysical therapyEmergency medicineAnesthesiaPsychiatryInsomnia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study described and compared the sleep experience of medical and surgical patients during a hospital stay. During 3 consecutive nights, patients (n = 110) self-reported sleep quality using the Verran and Snyder Sleep Scale (VSH) and potentially disruptive factors using items from the Factors Influencing Sleep Questionnaire (FISQ). Surgical patients, on the first night, received more procedural care (p = .001), less sedative medication (p < .001), reported more sleep disturbance (p = .02), less sleep effectiveness (p = .03), and more need for sleep supplementation (p = .03). Variance in sleep effectiveness was explained by the FISQ score, age, and length of time in hospital (F = 6.86, p < .001). The sleep experience of patients varies between diagnostic groupings and across the hospital stay. Unit environmental and personal factors, factors that are amenable to therapeutic interventions, strongly influence the sleep experience.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.539
Teacher spread0.431 · 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

Citations97
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Nursing ResearchSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207