0858 Teenage Girls Report Higher Impact Of Sleepiness During School And Personal Activities Than Teenage Boys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Researchers have shown that during adolescence, sleep goes through modifications, such as a delay in the sleep-wake patterns. This comes into conflict with the fixed schedules imposed by social and school demands and therefore has an influence on teenagers’ sleepiness and daytime functioning. Whether boys and girls report similar negative impact of sleep disturbances on their daytime functioning is examined in the present study. 731 adolescents (311 boys; 420 girls; 13–17,5y; grade 9–11) completed a questionnaire among which were questions on sleep and daytime functioning: 1) difficulties staying awake during class in the morning, (2) during class in the afternoon, and (3) after class while doing their homework; (4) being too tired to do activities with their friends, (5) missing school because of being too tired; (6) falling asleep during class; (7) feeling less motivated in school because of their poor sleep; (8) consuming coffee or energy drinks to compensate for their daytime sleepiness; and (9) taking naps during weekends. Items were answered on a 7 point Likert scale (1=never; 7=often). Gender differences were assessed using t-tests. Teenage girls reported more difficulties staying awake during class in the morning (t(723)=-3.95, p<.001), during class in the afternoon (t(720)=-3.98,p<.001), and during homework (t(720)=-4.11, p<.001) than boys. They also reported feeling too tired to do activities with their friends (t(721)=-3.40, p=.001), missing school because of being too tired (t(719.18)=-4.10, p<.001), feeling less motivated in school because of their poor sleep (t(695.93)=-4.20, p<.001), and taking naps during weekends (t(698.36)=-3.41,p=.001) more often than boys. However, there was no gender difference when it comes to using coffee or energy drinks to compensate for daytime sleepiness (t(715)=-.53; p=.60) or for falling asleep in class (t(722)=-.77; p=.44). Overall, our results show that girls reported a higher degree of interference of daytime sleepiness on multiple aspects of their school and personal activities than boys. This suggests that teenage girls may be more vulnerable to the negative impacts of sleep changes during adolescence than teenage boys. NA
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".