Uninterrupted Infant Sleep, Development, and Maternal Mood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Contrary to the importance of total sleep duration, the association between sleeping through the night and development in early infancy remains unclear. Our aims were to investigate the proportion of infants who sleep through the night (6- or 8-hour sleep blocks) at ages 6 and 12 months in a longitudinal cohort and to explore associations between sleeping through the night, mental and psychomotor development, maternal mood, and breastfeeding. METHODS: At 6 and 12 months of age, maternal reports were used to assess the longest period of uninterrupted infant sleep and feeding method (n = 388). Two different criteria were used to determine if infants slept through the night: 6 and 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep. Mental and psychomotor developmental indices (Bayley Scales of Infant Development II) and maternal mood (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale) were measured at 6, 12, and 36 months of age. RESULTS: Using a definition of either 6 or 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep, we found that 27.9% to 57.0% of 6- and 12-month-old infants did not sleep through the night. Linear regressions revealed no significant associations between sleeping through the night and concurrent or later mental development, psychomotor development, or maternal mood (P > .05). However, sleeping through the night was associated with a much lower rate of breastfeeding (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Considering that high proportions of infants did not sleep through the night and that no associations were found between uninterrupted sleep, mental or psychomotor development, and maternal mood, expectations for early sleep consolidation could be moderated.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".