Better Nights/Better Days—Distance Intervention for Insomnia in School-Aged Children With/Without ADHD: A Randomized Controlled Trial
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
OBJECTIVE: Better Nights/Better Days, a distance intervention for insomnia in school-aged children (with and without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD]), was evaluated to determine its effectiveness on children's sleep and psychosocial functioning. METHODS: A single center, parallel group design randomized controlled trial (stratified on ADHD diagnosis) was conducted. Parents were randomized to intervention (n = 31) or waitlist control (n = 30), and completed questionnaires administered over the phone at baseline, postintervention (2 months), and follow-up (6 months). Actigraphy was also collected. The intervention consisted of a five-session manual and weekly telephone coach support. RESULTS: The intervention group demonstrated a significant reduction in sleep problems and improved psychosocial functioning at postintervention and follow-up. Actigraphy results indicated improved sleep onset, but not sleep duration. Children with and without ADHD responded in a similar manner to this intervention. Parents provided high satisfaction ratings. CONCLUSIONS: This intervention holds promise as an accessible, sustainable, and effective program to address insomnia in school-aged children.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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