A Behavioral-Educational Intervention to Promote Pediatric Sleep During Hospitalization: A Pilot 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/BACKGROUND: Hospitalization can contribute to common sleep difficulties in children. Interventions aimed at hospitalized children need to be developed and piloted with rigorous evaluative methods. The primary purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility and acceptability of a behavioral-educational intervention aimed at increasing nighttime sleep for hospitalized children. PARTICIPANTS: Hospitalized children aged 4-10 years and their caregivers. METHODS: A pilot randomized, controlled trial with concealed-group allocation was conducted. Forty-eight hospitalized children (ages 4-10) and their care-givers were randomized to either the Relax to Sleep (RTS) intervention group (n = 24) or the Usual Care (UC) comparison group (n = 24). The RTS intervention was comprised of a one-on-one educational session for the parent that was guided by a standardized booklet containing information on sleep and instructions for training the child in the use of a diaphragmatic breathing exercise. UC participants received no information about sleep or relaxation. Children wore actigraphs for 3 days and nights and completed sleep diaries. Outcome measures included feasibility, acceptability, and sleep outcomes. RESULTS: Parental reports indicated they enjoyed the discussion on sleep, found the information helpful, and their child found diaphragmatic breathing easy to use, and would use it again in the future. Children in the RTS group averaged 50 minutes more nighttime sleep, and had less wake after sleep onset time compared to children in the UC group. CONCLUSION: Sleep is critically important to children's health and well-being and should be given important consideration during hospitalization. Although the results of this pilot trial seem promising, more interventional studies are needed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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