MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514141922 · doi:10.1177/0165025416667851

Paternal involvement and child sleep

2016· article· en· W2514141922 on OpenAlexaff
Annie Bernier, Émilie Tétreault, Marie‐Ève Bélanger, Julie Carrier

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Development · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyActigraphyDevelopmental psychologySleep (system call)Psychological interventionCognitionChild developmentClinical psychologyPsychiatryInsomnia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While maternal influences on young children’s sleep are increasingly documented, the study of paternal contributions to this important sphere of child functioning is only just beginning. In addition, much of this emerging research has focused on infancy only or has relied on parental reports of child sleep. The current study aimed to examine the associations between paternal involvement and child sleep during toddlerhood, a period that witnesses both increased paternal involvement in child care and marked developments in child sleep. Fathers ( N = 85) reported on their involvement when their toddlers were aged 2 years, and sleep was assessed objectively with actigraphy at age 3. Results indicated that above and beyond several key covariates, fathers who reported engaging more frequently in emotional support with their 2-year-old child, and those who reported evoking the child more often, had children who slept longer at night 1 year later. These results are among the first to suggest potential paternal influences on children’s sleep after the infancy period. They raise the possibility that interventions seeking to enhance paternal involvement may carry benefits for toddlers’ sleep and consequently, for aspects of cognition, behavior, and emotion that depend on adequate sleep regulation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations32
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Behavioral DevelopmentSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207