Alzheimer’s Disease Severity is Not Significantly Associated with Short Sleep: Survey by Actigraphy on 208 Mild and Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In epidemiological surveys, cognitive decline has been found to be associated with both short and long sleep duration. OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to objectively determine how total sleep time (TST) at night was associated or not with apathy or severity scores in patients with Alzheimer 's disease (AD). METHODS: During an observational first step of a clinical trial, sleep was assessed in institutionalized patients with mild or moderate AD using actigraphy (MW8, Camtech, Cambridge, UK) for 14 consecutive 24-hour periods. Sleep parameters analyzed were: TST, time in bed (TIB), wake after sleep onset (WASO), sleep efficiency (SE) defined by the ratio TST/TIB, in percentage), the number and length of awakenings, the night fragmentation index, the interdaily stability, and intradaily variability indexes. Statistical association analyses were tested between these values and AD apathy and severity scores. RESULTS: 208 individuals coming from 82 centers worldwide (France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Poland, United States, Canada, and Australia) and≥50 years old participated. Their average TST was 7 hours and 35 minutes and the average WASO 58 minutes. TST and SE were significantly higher in patients with apathy and the number of awakenings was significantly lower. TST was also positively associated with functional disability (ADCS-ADL scores), but it was not found significantly greater in patients with a moderate AD severity compared to the mild. CONCLUSION: Despite several and long awakenings, TST was not shorter in patients with AD. TST was even significantly increased with disability and apathy.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".