MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939924020 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsz067.777

0779 Parental Depressive Symptoms and Infant Sleep Arrangements : The Contributing Role of Parental Expectations

2019· article· en· W2939924020 on OpenAlexaff
Gabrielle Chénier-Leduc, Marie‐Julie Béliveau, Samantha Kenny, Marjolaine Chicoine, Karine Dubois‐Comtois, Marie‐Hélène Pennestri

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresHôpital Rivière-des-PrairiesMcGill UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcordanceSleep (system call)PsychologyDepression (economics)Depressive symptomsCenter for Epidemiologic Studies Depression ScaleClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryAnxietyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infant sleep arrangements have been shown to be associated with maternal depressive symptoms. However, parental expectations about infant sleep location are rarely taken into consideration. Moreover, there is little research that includes fathers in pediatric sleep studies. The aims of this study were 1) to compare parental attitudes regarding sleep arrangements (solitary vs co-sleeping), and 2) to explore the association between current sleep location, expectations, and depressive symptoms, in both mothers and fathers. Sixty participants (30 couples), took part in this study when their infant was 6 months old. General attitudes about solitary sleeping and co-sleeping, current sleep location (solitary vs co-sleeping), and concordance between parental expectations and current infant sleep arrangement (Does your baby currently sleep where you expected him to sleep?), were assessed using the Sleep Practice Questionnaire (SPQ). Parental depressive symptoms were measured using the self-administered Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). Parental attitudes about infant sleep arrangement were compared using paired t-tests. A linear regression analysis was used to assess the predictive value of sleep location (solitary vs co-sleep) and concordance between expected and current sleeping arrangement on depressive symptoms. In general, fathers were more supportive than mothers of solitary sleeping arrangements (p≤0.001), and mothers were more supportive than fathers of co-sleeping arrangements (p≤0.05), regardless of the infant’s current sleep location. When both mothers and fathers were pooled together, current sleep location was not associated with depressive symptoms (p>0.05). However, when current sleep location was different than expected, higher levels of depressive symptoms were observed (p<0.01). Mothers and fathers have different attitudes regarding solitary sleeping and co-sleeping arrangements. While the current sleeping location per se did not contribute to the presence of depressive symptoms, a mismatch between expectations and current sleeping arrangement was associated with more depressive symptoms. Researchers and clinicians should consider the expectations of both parents regarding their infant’s sleep arrangement. 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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.814

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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 topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207