Sleep duration and eating behaviours in youth: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Developmental alterations to the circadian rhythm, in combination with lifestyle changes (eg, changes in school start time, part-time employment), contribute to insufficient sleep among youth. Insufficient sleep is associated with poor eating behaviours in other developmental stages (ie, childhood, adulthood); however, it is currently unknown if this finding generalises to youth. Consequently, identifying the characteristics and results of the studies examining this relationship in youth populations is necessary to guide the future direction of research in this field. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a scoping review to investigate the literature examining the relationship between sleep duration and eating behaviours in youth. The proposed scoping review will follow the standard six-stage protocol outlined by Arksey and O'Malley. To acquire relevant publications, systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, CINHAL, PsycINFO and Scopus in August 2019. Following this, a scan of the grey literature will be conducted. All relevant publications will be screened for their eligibility based on the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A data extraction tool will be used to collate, summarise and report the results. The findings of the scoping review will be reviewed by relevant stakeholders to aid in interpreting and disseminating the findings. The proposed review will identify existing gaps in the literature and inform the conduct of future studies aimed at understanding the effects of insufficient/excessive sleep and the eating behaviours of youth. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This scoping review does not require ethics approval. Following the completion of the study, the findings will be disseminated at scientific meetings, submitted for peer-reviewed publication and translated to an accessible format for other relevant stakeholders.
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 | 0.104 | 0.092 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.067 | 0.015 |
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".