Factors Related to the Occurrence of Isolated Sleep Paralysis Elicited During a Multi-Phasic Sleep-Wake Schedule
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To further investigate mechanisms of isolated sleep paralysis (ISP) in normal individuals, we experimentally elicited ISPs by facilitating sleep onset REM periods (SOREMP), a prerequisite of ISPs, and examined behavioral and psychological measurements relating to ISP appearances. DESIGN: The multi-phasic sleep/wake schedule (MPS) began at approximately midnight and ended when net sleep reached 7.5 hours. Participants were awakened after every 5 min of REM sleep to obtain a maximum number of SOREMPs. Upon each awakening, mentation reports and subjective measurements were collected. Performance tests were then assigned. SETTING: Sleep lab, Tokyo Metropolitan Institute for Neurosciences, Japan. PARTICIPANTS: Thirteen healthy Japanese students (10 males) with high self-reported frequencies of ISPs but no other narcolepsy-related symptoms. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: From 184 sleep interruptions, 8 ISP episodes were obtained. In within participant comparisons between episodes with and without ISPs, the vigilance task (VT) reaction times were elevated before SOREMPs with ISPs. In between analyses (ISP vs non-ISP), the ISP group showed poorer performance, more complaints of physical, mental, and neurotic symptoms, increased subjective fatigue and increased stage 1 throughout the entire schedule. VT hit rates remained constant in the non-ISP group, but dropped in the later part of schedule in the ISP group. Subjective sleepiness dropped over time in the non-ISP group while it slightly increased in the ISP group. CONCLUSIONS: ISP is likely to appear as a phenotype of REM dissociation during SOREMP when participants with low tolerance for disrupted sleep-wake rhythms are placed in this type of schedule.
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".