Weekly, Seasonal, and Geographic Patterns in Health Contemplations About Sundown Syndrome: An Ecological Correlational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Sundown syndrome (ie, agitation later in the day) is common in older adults with dementia. The underlying etiology for these behaviors is unclear. Possibilities include increased caregiver fatigue at the end of the day and disruption of circadian rhythms by both age and neurodegenerative illness. Objective: This study sought to examine circumseptan (weekly) patterns in search volumes related to sundown syndrome, in order to determine if such searches peaked at the end of the weekend, a time when caregiver supports are least available. We also sought to examine both seasonal differences and associations of state-by-state search activity with both state latitude and yearly sun exposure. Methods: Daily Internet search query data was obtained from Google Trends (2005-2017 inclusive). Circumseptan patterns were determined by wavelet analysis, and seasonality was determined by the difference in search volumes between winter (December, January, and February) and summer (June, July, and August) months. Geographic associations between percent sunny days and latitude were done on a state-by-state basis. Results: “Sundowning” searches showed a significant increase at the end of the weekend with activity being 10.9% (SD 4.0) higher on Sunday as compared to the rest of the week. Search activity showed a seasonal pattern with search activity significantly highest in the winter months (36.6 [SD 0.6] vs 13.7 [SD 0.2], P<.001). State-by-state variations in “sundowning” searches showed a significant negative association with increasing mean daily sunlight (R2=.16, β=-.429 [SD .149], P=.006) and showed a positive association with increasing latitude (R2=.38, β=.648 [SD .122], P<.001). Conclusions: Interest in “sundowning” is highest after a weekend, which is a time when external caregiver support is reduced. Searches related to sundown syndrome also were highest in winter, in states with less sun, and in states at more northerly latitudes, supporting disrupted circadian rhythms as another contributing factor to these behaviors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".