Diurnal and circadian variation of sleep and alertness in men vs. naturally cycling women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study quantifies sex differences in the diurnal and circadian variation of sleep and waking while controlling for menstrual cycle phase and hormonal contraceptive use. We compared the diurnal and circadian variation of sleep and alertness of 8 women studied during two phases of the menstrual cycle and 3 women studied during their midfollicular phase with that of 15 men. Participants underwent an ultradian sleep-wake cycle (USW) procedure consisting of 36 cycles of 60-min wake episodes alternating with 60-min nap opportunities. Core body temperature (CBT), salivary melatonin, subjective alertness, and polysomnographically recorded sleep were measured throughout this procedure. All analyzed measures showed a significant diurnal and circadian variation throughout the USW procedure. Compared with men, women demonstrated a significant phase advance of the CBT but not melatonin rhythms, as well as an advance in the diurnal and circadian variation of sleep measures and subjective alertness. Furthermore, women experienced an increased amplitude of the diurnal and circadian variation of alertness, mainly due to a larger decline in the nocturnal nadir. Our results indicate that women are likely initiating sleep at a later circadian phase than men, which may be one factor contributing to the increased susceptibility to sleep disturbances reported in women. Lower nighttime alertness is also observed, suggesting a physiological basis for a greater susceptibility to maladaptation to night shift work in women.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".