MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969865377 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026942

Sleep duration and multimorbidity in Luxembourg: results from the European Health Examination Survey in Luxembourg, 2013–2015

2019· article· en· W2969865377 on OpenAlexaff
María Ruiz‐Castell, Tatjana T. Makovski, Valéry Bocquet, Saverio Stranges

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Disease Management Strategies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSocioeconomic statusDemographyCross-sectional studyDuration (music)Sleep (system call)National Health and Nutrition Examination SurveyPopulationGerontologyEpidemiologyPediatricsEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We estimated the prevalence of short sleep duration and multimorbidity in Luxembourg, and assessed whether sleep duration was associated with multimorbidity after adjusting for sociodemographic and behavioural characteristics. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PARTICIPANTS: Data from 1508 Luxembourg residents (48% men and 52% women) aged 25 to 64 years came from the European Health Examination Survey 2013-2015. OUTCOME MEASURES: Short sleep duration and multimorbidity. RESULTS: Participants reported sleeping 6.95 hours/night during work days, nearly 1 hour less than during non-work days (7.86 hours/night). Nearly half of participants reported having been diagnosed with ≥2 chronic conditions/diseases. Short sleep duration was associated with the number of chronic conditions (OR 4.65, 95% CI 1.48 to 14.51; OR 7.30, 95% CI 2.35 to 22.58; OR 6.79, 95% CI 2.15 to 21.41 for 1, 2 and ≥3 chronic conditions/diseases, respectively), independently of socioeconomic and behavioural characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Health promotion programmes should aim at improving and promoting healthy lifestyles among the general population to improve sleep habits as well as decrease multimorbidity in middle-aged adults.

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)0.001
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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations74
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicChronic Disease Management StrategiesFrench-language works237,207