The natural history of insomnia: Focus on prevalence and incidence of acute insomnia
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite Acute Insomnia being classified as a distinct nosological entity since 1979/1980 (ASDC/DSM III-R), there are no published estimates of its prevalence and incidence or data regarding transition to chronic insomnia or remission. This lack of data prevents an understanding of: a) the pathogenesis of insomnia and b) when and how treatment should be initiated. The aim of the present study was to provide such data from two community samples. Samples were recruited in the USA (n = 2861) and the North East of the UK (n = 1095). Additionally, 412 Normal Sleepers from the UK sample were surveyed longitudinally to determine prospectively incidence, transition, and remission rates for acute insomnia and assess whether the acute insomnia was a first episode, recurrent episode, or co-morbid with symptoms of other illnesses. The prevalence of acute insomnia was 9.5% (USA) and 7.9%(UK). The prevalence of three acute insomnia subtypes in the UK were; First-Onset Acute Insomnia 2.6%; Recurrent Acute Insomnia 3.8%; and 1.4% Co-morbid Acute Insomnia. The annual incidence of acute insomnia in the UK sample was between 31.2% and 36.6%. Remission rates fluctuated depending upon the definition of acute insomnia and whether the current episode was first-onset or recurrent. These findings provide preliminary insights into the natural history of insomnia. Such data will serve to inform how and when acute insomnia should be managed and whether such interventions may serve to diminish subsequent morbidity, particularly with respect to Major Depression.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it