MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977106324 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v10n1p43

Fostering the sleep instructional guidelines for nursing students regarding their sleep quality, academic performance and psychosocial behavior

2019· article· en· W2977106324 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nahed Saied El‐Nagger, Orban Ragab Bayoumi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexSleep (system call)NursingPsychologyBedtimeChristian ministryMedicineEpworth Sleepiness ScaleSleep qualityMedical educationPhysical therapyClinical psychologyCognitionPsychiatryPolysomnography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objective: Sleep is a basic human need and has a necessary role in individual’s life, functioning, overall health and well-being. Sleep is necessary for college students’ intellectual, emotional and physical health, also for their cognitive performance that significantly affected by sleep quality. Aim: To investigate the effect of fostering the sleep instructional guidelines for nursing students regarding their sleep quality, academic performance and psychosocial behavior.Methods: Design: A quasi-experimental study design was utilized. Setting: Faculty of Nursing at Umm Al-Qura University in Makkah Al-Mukramh affiliated to the Ministry of Education in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Sample: A purposive sample composed of 85 males and females nursing students from all academic years. Tools: Three tools were used Pre & Post including: (1) A self-administered Questionnaire Sheet, (2) Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and (3) Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI).Results: Slightly more than three quarters (78.82%) of nursing students their ages were ranged from 20-22 years and 69.41% of them were females. More than one fourth (27.06%) of students were having good sleep and 72.94% of them had poor sleep pre the sleep instructional guidelines compared with 81.18% and 18.82% of them post providing the instructional guidelines respectively.Conclusions: Fostering the instructional guidelines regarding sleep had positive effects on nursing students' sleep patterns in the form of sleep quality, bedtime at night, sleeping latency, sleeping efficiency and disturbances. In addition to enhancing students' academic performance and modifying their psychosocial behavior regarding daytime dysfunction, coffee consuming in the evening, bedroom environment, social isolation, and use of social media. Recommendations: Future research should carry out for university students' sleep patterns on a broad category as a regional research project all over the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) involving multidisciplinary team as doctors, nurses, psychologists, sociologists and nutritionists.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.253
GPT teacher head0.570
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207