Effet d’une intervention en polarité sur l’insomnie et l’anxiété de femmes québécoises d’âge moyen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many symptoms of menopause may contribute to poor sleep and insomnia. These symptoms may also be associated with anxiety and affect the quality of women’s lives. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a polarity therapy on insomnia and anxiety for women aged 40 to 60 years old. Forty-seven women participated in this experimental study. The participants were randomly assigned to the experiment group (n = 25)—receiving 4 sessions on polarity—or to the control group (n = 22)—receiving information on healthy sleep habits. Data were collected during the pre-test and the post-test using the Morin Insomnia Severity Index and the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (FormY). A significant difference was found between the groups and the measurement time with respect to insomnia scores (F = 28,66 ; p < 0,0001) and anxiety scores (F = 14.14; p < 0.0001). Women who received the polarity intervention showed a significant decrease in the severity of their insomnia and of their state of anxiety compared to those in the control group during post intervention. The polarity intervention was effective in reducing the women’s symptoms of insomnia and anxiety in the middle-aged women.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.005 | 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".