Sleep duration estimates of Canadian children and adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to provide contemporary sleep duration estimates of Canadian school-aged children and adolescents and to determine the proportion adhering to the sleep duration recommendations. This study included 24 896 participants aged 10-17 years from the 2013/2014 Canadian Health Behaviour in School-aged Children study (HBSC), a nationally representative cross-sectional study. Bedtime and wake-up times were reported by participants and their sleep duration was calculated. Participants were then classified as having a sleep duration that met the recommended range (9-11 h per night for 10-13-year-olds or 8-10 h per night for 14-17-year-olds), a sleep duration that was shorter than the recommended range or a sleep duration that was longer than the recommended range. An estimated 68% of children aged 10-13 years and 72% of adolescents aged 14-17 years sleep for the recommended amount per night when averaged across all days of the week. Short sleepers represent 31% of school-aged children and 26% of adolescents. Long sleepers are rare (<2% overall). Children and adolescents sleep ~1 h more at weekends compared to weekdays. Approximately 5% of the participants typically went to bed after midnight on weekdays and 31% did so at weekends; these proportions reached 11 and 45%, respectively, within 16-17-year-olds. In general, differences in sleep times between boys and girls are small and not clinically significant. In conclusion, almost one-third of Canadian children and adolescents sleep less than the recommended amount. Public health efforts should continue to monitor the sleep of Canadian children and adolescents and identify subgroups of the population more likely to be affected by insufficient sleep.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".