MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802120874 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsy061.147

0148 Assessment of Sleep Depth and Propensity during Sleep Restriction using the Odds-Ratio-Product

2018· article· en· W2802120874 on OpenAlexaff
Paula K. Schweitzer, Kara Griffin, Magdy Younes, J K Walsh

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaResearch Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSleep (system call)Sleep restrictionWakefulnessOdds ratioArousalPsychologyAudiologyInsomniaElectroencephalographyCircadian rhythmMedicineSleep deprivationInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Odds-Ratio Product (ORP) is a continuous measure of the relative power in four EEG frequency bands. ORP ranges from 0 (deep sleep) to 2.5 (full wakefulness). A prior study of patients with sleep disorders revealed excellent correlation between ORP during any sleep epoch and probability of arousal occurring in the next 30 seconds (r2=0.98), suggesting it may serve as a measure of sleep depth and propensity. To further test this hypothesis, we determined the response of ORP produced by sleep restriction (SR), using a previously-published data set in which delta/theta power was reported to show no change during the first two SR nights and a marginal increase during the subsequent two SR nights. Twenty-one healthy subjects (12 f; age 32.0 ± 9.9y) underwent two 8-9h PSGs (baseline) followed by four consecutive nights of SR (5 h/night, starting 1:00 AM). ORP was measured at 3-second intervals and averaged over individual sleep stages, total sleep time (TST), and total recording time (TRT). ORP values from the SR nights were compared to the corresponding values in the first 5 hours of baseline night 2. Relative to baseline, ORP decreased significantly during wake epochs in each of the four SR nights (-4.1 ± 3.0%, -5.1 ± 5.8%, -4.5 ± 6.4%, and -9.8 ± 7.8% of baseline, respectively; P<0.01 for all nights). As predicted, there were no significant ORP changes in any sleep stage on SR night 1. ORP decreased significantly in all sleep stages during each of the subsequent three SR nights. Magnitude of change from baseline in ORP (ΔORP) varied considerably among subjects; decreases of 0%-50% for ORP in TRT and 0%-28% for ORP in TST. In two subjects ORP increased consistently during SR. ΔORP was consistent within each subject across the last three SR nights (r>0.78 for all comparisons). ORP behaves as expected during sleep restriction. Additionally, ORP appears more sensitive than delta/theta power in detecting change in sleep pressure. Moreover, wake ORP is sensitive to sleep pressure. There are considerable, but consistent, differences in ORP response among individuals. Support (If Any):

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicEEG and Brain-Computer InterfacesFrench-language works237,207