Impact of Sleep Restriction on Neurobehavioral Functioning of Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
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
STUDY OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the cumulative impact of 1 hour of nightly sleep restriction over the course of 6 nights on the neurobehavioral functioning (NBF) of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and healthy controls. DESIGN: Following 6 nights of actigraphic monitoring of sleep to determine baseline sleep duration, children were asked to restrict sleep duration by 1 hour for 6 consecutive nights. NBF was assessed at baseline (Day 6) and following sleep manipulation (Day 12). SETTING: A quiet location within their home environments. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-three children (11 ADHD, 32 Controls, mean age = 8.7 years, SD = 1.3) between the ages of 7 and 11 years. INTERVENTIONS: NA. MEASUREMENTS: Sleep was monitored using actigraphy. In addition, parents were asked to complete nightly sleep logs. Sleepiness was evaluated using a questionnaire. The Conners' Continuous Performance Test (CPT) was used to assess NBF. RESULTS: Restricted sleep led to poorer CPT scores on two-thirds of CPT outcome measures in both healthy controls and children with ADHD. The performance of children with ADHD following sleep restriction deteriorated from subclinical levels to the clinical range of inattention on two-thirds of CPT outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate sleep restriction leads to a detectable negative impact on the NBF of children with ADHD and healthy controls, leading to a clinical level of impairment in children with ADHD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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