MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145039187 · doi:10.1002/icd.527

A model for predicting behavioural sleep problems in a random sample of Australian pre‐schoolers

2007· article· en· W2145039187 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInfant and Child Development · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyChecklistSleep (system call)Developmental psychologyPopulationChild Behavior ChecklistDepression (economics)DistressClinical psychologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Behavioural sleep problems (childhood insomnias) can cause distress for both parents and children. This paper reports a model describing predictors of high sleep problem scores in a representative population‐based random sample survey of non‐Aboriginal singleton children born in 1995 and 1996 (1085 girls and 1129 boys) in Western Australia. Longitudinal repeated data were collected up to age 4 years by caregiver report. Children's sleep rhythmicity levels in their first year, as well as conflicted and lax parenting in their second year, predicted higher scores on the sleep problem scale from the Child Behaviour Checklist/2–3 in the children's third year. Higher scores on the sleep problem scale in the children's third year predicted higher scores on the aggressive behaviour subscale of the Child Behaviour Checklist/4–16. The results support a model in which sleep problems mediated the relationship between parental conflict and aggressive behaviour, even when controlling for maternal depression, which has been associated with children's aggressive behaviour. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.535

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.255 · 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