Evaluating the effects of general anesthesia on sleep in children undergoing elective surgery: an observational case–control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study Objectives: Previous research has suggested that general anesthetics can disturb postoperative sleep patterns by affecting the sleep-wake cycle. The objective was to identify the effects of general anesthetics on sleep quality and related behavioral changes in children. Methods: This was a prospective, observational case-control study with children, aged 18 months to 8 years, undergoing general anesthesia for elective surgery. Participants wore an actigraph for 7 days on three occasions: prior to surgery, the immediate postoperative period, and 3 months after surgery. Data regarding behavior patterns were collected using behavioral assessments at baseline, the first postoperative week, and 3 months following surgery. Results: Thirty-one participants (mean age 4.8 ± 2.0 years, 81% male) underwent urologic or otolaryngologic surgery. The median (interquartile range) anesthetic duration was 132.0 (80.0-184.0) min. No significant differences were found in sleep efficiency, total sleep time, wake time after sleep onset, or sleep onset latency between baseline, 7 day postoperative period, and the 3 month follow-up. No significant differences were found in sleep-related behavioral metrics including internalizing and externalizing behaviors, and executive functioning. Data were compared with a control group of 18 participants (mean age 5.3 ± 1.8 years, 61% male). No significant differences were found in sleep patterns and related behavioral metrics between both groups. Conclusions: In this study, general anesthesia did not result in disturbed sleep or associated negative behavioral changes in otherwise healthy children undergoing elective surgeries of low complexity. Physicians can advise parents that a child's surgery and associated general anesthetic exposure may not result in significant changes in postoperative sleep patterns.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".