Omega-3 and omega-6 Fatty Acid Biomarkers and Sleep Duration: Pooled Analysis from Five Prospective Studies in the Fatty Acids and Outcome Research Consortium (FORCE) (P08-116-19)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both too little and too much sleep may be detrimental for health, and emerging evidence suggests links between diet and sleep duration. n-3 and n-6 fatty acids (FAs) have physiologic roles in sleep processes including initiation, regulation, and melatonin production. We aimed to assess the association of circulating n-3 and n-6 FA biomarkers with sleep duration in the Fatty Acids and Outcome Research Consortium (FORCE). A pooled cross-sectional analysis of harmonized individual-level analyses from 5 prospective cohorts was performed. FA biomarkers assessed included 18:3n-3, 20:5n-3, 22:5n-3, 22:6n-3, 18:2n-6, 20:4n-6, and the sum of n-3 FAs in lipid compartments (phospholipids, cholesterol esters, total plasma, and total serum). FAs were measured between 1993–2016 and expressed as % of total FAs. Sleep duration was self-reported and categorized as <7 hrs, 7–8 hrs or >8 hrs. The 5 pooled studies comprised 4,691 participants aged 35 to 96 from Finland, Iceland, Sweden and USA. Associations between FAs and sleep duration per interquintile range (10th-90thpercentile) were assessed with a standardized protocol including definitions for exposures, outcomes and covariates. Cohort level odds ratios (OR) were pooled with inverse-variance weighting. Overall, 1,229, 2,812 and 650 participants had sleep duration <7 hrs, 7–8 hrs (reference category) and >8 hrs, respectively. In pooled multivariable adjusted analyses, higher 22:6n-3 was associated with lower odds of sleeping >8 hrs (OR per interquintile range: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.53–0.94); as was the sum of n-3 FAs (OR per interquintile range: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.58–0.99). Other individual n-3 or n-6 FAs were not significantly associated with sleep duration >8 hrs; and none of the n-3 or n-6 FAs were associated with sleep duration <7 hrs. These novel findings demonstrate relationships between n-3 FAs, especially 22:6n-3, and longer sleep duration. The results highlight the need for future prospective studies and interventions to establish temporality, causality, and potential mechanisms. ILSI North America.
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 | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".