Quality of Preterm Infants’ Night Sleep: and Online Community-Based Survey of Maternal Factors and Perceptions of Infants’ Nighttime Awakenings and Sleep Problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Between one-quarter and one-third of infants aged six months to five years have sleeping problems. Infants' night sleep patterns, in particular problematic night waking with crying, are a common concern for parents. Many factors can influence the development of infants’ night sleep patterns and sleep problems, including parental interaction. Objectives: To examine the associations between premature infants’ nighttime awakening, mothers’ reports of sleep problem severity, and maternal factors, including mothers’ styles of attachment and behaviors used to settle their infants to sleep. Method: The cross sectional survey study used a web-based questionnaire to collect data from a community-based sample of 105 mothers of singleton premature infants aged 5-6 months (corrected age) across a number of English speaking countries. The main outcome measures were mothers’ perceptions of infants’ nighttime awakenings (frequency and duration) and presence of infant sleep problems. Results: Of the 55% of mothers who reported that their infants had sleep problems, 17% described the problem as serious. The majority of infants woke 2.1 times per night for an average of 45.7 minutes per night. Mothers’ style of attachment and personal history of sleep problems predicted the duration of the infants’ nighttime awakening, whereas maternal active physical comforting predicted the frequency of nighttime awakenings. Conclusions: The findings can guide healthcare providers to screen mothers for an anxious style of attachment, perceptions of infant sleep problems, and use of active physical comforting strategies for bedtime settling when assessing premature infants’ sleep problems. Keywords: Maternal Attachment, Nighttime Awakenings, Premature Infant, Settling Strategies, Sleep Problem
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".