MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516368491 · doi:10.1037/hea0000408

Temporal relationships between sleep and physical activity among breast cancer patients with insomnia.

2016· article· en· W2516368491 on OpenAlexaff
Paquito Bernard, Hans Ivers, Marie‐Hélène Savard, Josée Savard

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Psychology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActigraphySleep onsetInsomniaSleep onset latencySleep diaryBreast cancerSleep (system call)MedicinePrimary InsomniaPsycINFOPhysical activityPhysical therapyPsychologyInternal medicineSleep disorderCancerPsychiatryMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The present study prospectively investigated the day-to-day bidirectional relationships between objective measures of sleep parameters and physical activity among breast cancer patients with insomnia symptoms. METHOD: A subgroup of participants (N = 66) enrolled in a randomized controlled trial for insomnia comorbid with cancer wore an actigraphic recorder for seven 24-hr periods before the intervention. Multilevel models examined whether sleep parameters (sleep onset latency, wake after sleep onset [WASO], total wake time [TWT], sleep efficiency [SE], and total sleep time [TST]) on a given night predicted the levels of physical activity (daily activity counts and minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity [MVPA]) the following day and vice versa. RESULTS: Adjusted models revealed that a lower WASO (β= -.12, SE = .07, p < .05), TWT (β = -.14, SE = .05, p < .05), and TST (β = -.14, SE = .06, p < .05) were significantly associated with a greater daily activity count fluctuation the next day. Conversely, greater total daily count fluctuations were significantly associated with a higher WASO (β = .18, SE = .08, p < .05), TWT (β = .12, SE = .04, p < .05), and TST (β = .22, SE = .08, p < .05) the following night. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support a reciprocal and complex relationship between sleep parameters and physical activity. While they do not confirm a possible beneficial effect of physical activity on objective sleep parameters, they suggest that successful insomnia treatment could increase daily physical activity in patients with cancer. (PsycINFO Database Record

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.366
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations24
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth PsychologySame topicCancer survivorship and careFrench-language works237,207