MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2937852203 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsz067.236

0237 Internight Variability in the Sleep Consolidation Process

2019· article· en· W2937852203 on OpenAlexaff
Marie‐Hélène Pennestri, Rebecca Burdayron, Marie‐Julie Béliveau, Karine Dubois‐Comtois

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman auditory perception and evaluation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresUniversité de MontréalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSleep (system call)MedicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

New parents are often concerned about when their infant will consolidate their sleep, a process referred to as « sleeping through the night ». While the proportion of infants who sleep through the night increases with age, studies have shown considerable variability among infants in this process. The majority of studies rely on questionnaires, where mothers are asked to report their infant’s sleep patterns over a specific period of time. However, infant sleep may also vary from night to night. In order to document night-to-night variability in infant sleep consolidation, this study aims to assess the percentage of nights that infants sleep through the night, during a two-week period at 6 months of age, by maternal report. Data from 37 mothers of typically developing infants (40% first-borns) were analyzed. At 6 months post-partum, mothers were asked to complete an infant sleep diary for 13 consecutive days. Based on these diaries, the longest consecutive sleep period (without interruption) was retrieved. Sleeping through the night was defined as 6 or 8 hours of consecutive sleep. The percentage of nights every infant was meeting this criterion over 13 nights was calculated. The mean longest consecutive sleep period (assessed for 13 nights) reported by mothers was 347.2±128.7 minutes (range:156.9-612.9). As hypothesized, a large inter-night variability was observed. Using a definition of 6 hours, mothers reported in average that their infant slept through the night 41.5% (±33.0) of the time (5-6 nights out of 13); using a definition of 8 hours, mothers reported that their infant slept through the night 22.1% (±29.3) of the time (3 nights out of 13). These preliminary findings show an important inter-night variability in infant sleep consolidation process. Questionnaires that assess whether infants sleep through the night over a shorter period of time may not capture this great variability. Mothers should be informed about this variability and know that even if their infant sleeps for 6 hours consecutively one night, it does not necessarily mean that this behaviour will occur every night. SSHRC, FRQS

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicHuman auditory perception and evaluationFrench-language works237,207