MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2248325714 · doi:10.14740/ijcp210w

Delayed Sleep Phase Disorder in Children With Non-Monosymptomatic Primary Nocturnal Enuresis

2015· article· en· W2248325714 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Parsa Yousefichaijan, Ali Khosrobeigi, Bahman Salehi, Hassan Taherahmadi, Fakhreddin Shariatmadari, Yazdan Ghandi, Ali Arjmand

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Clinical Pediatrics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUrinary Bladder and Prostate Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnuresisMedicineNocturnalPediatricsDelayed sleep phaseCircadian rhythmSleep disorderPsychiatryInternal medicineInsomnia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Delayed sleep phase disorder (DSPD), a circadian rhythm disorder, involves a significant, persistent, and intractable phase shift in sleep-wake schedule (later sleep onset and wake time) that conflicts with the individua l’s normal school, work, and/or lifestyle demands. Nocturnal enuresis (NE) is one of the most frequent pediatric pathologies. The prevalence of primary nocturnal enuresis (PNE) is around 9% in children aged 5 - 10 years and about 40% of them have one or more episodes per week. Methods: In this study, we recruited 160 children with monosymptomatic primary nocturnal enuresis (MPNE) and 160 healthy children without MPNE aged 6 - 18 years old. The children sleep pattern was completed by the parents. Data were analyzed using t -test and Chi-square tests. Results: Among 320 children in both groups, DSPD was significantly different between cases and controls. Conclusions: Considering the results of this study, the higher prevalence of DSPD in children with non-monosymptomatic primary nocturnal enuresis (NMPNE) highlights the importance of early intervention for better treatment and prevention of DSPD in children. Int J Clin Pediatr. 2015;4(4):178-180 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/ijcp210w

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.435

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Clinical PediatricsSame topicUrinary Bladder and Prostate ResearchFrench-language works237,207