Identifying specific insomnia components in borderline personality disorder and their influence on emotion dysregulation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Insomnia-related sleep problems are common in borderline personality disorder (BPD) and exacerbate the core of BPD, emotion dysregulation. Insomnia is elicited and maintained through behaviors that disrupt both the homeostatic and circadian sleep systems. However, it is unclear which homeostatic or circadian insomnia behaviors characterize BPD and exacerbate emotion dysregulation, thus warranting clinical attention in this population. This study therefore investigated whether homeostatic (i.e., abnormalities in time in bed and sleep efficiency [SE]) and circadian (i.e., abnormalities in risetime variability and chronotypes) behaviors characterize and exacerbate emotion dysregulation in BPD group relative to healthy control (HC) and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) groups. Participants from the community who met criteria for BPD, GAD, or no psychological disorders (HCs) were recruited and completed measures of emotion dysregulation. They also completed measures of daily homeostatic and circadian insomnia behaviors for 14 days. Generalized estimating equations revealed that the GAD group exhibited lower SE than HCs, and there was a marginally significant effect wherein the BPD group exhibited delayed risetimes relative to the GAD group. Moreover, higher time in bed predicted elevated emotion dysregulation in HCs but lower emotion dysregulation in the GAD group. Higher SE predicted higher emotion dysregulation in BPD. These results suggest that the influence of insomnia behaviors on emotion dysregulation is heterogeneous. Idiographic assessments of the influence of insomnia behaviors on emotion dysregulation are advised. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".