MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029312211 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsaa056.048

0049 Odds Ratio Product as a Measure of Sleep Depth During REM Sleep: Effects on REM Duration and REM Sleep Fragmentation

2020· article· en· W3029312211 on OpenAlexaff
Diego R. Mazzotti, Magdy Younes

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSleep (system call)PolysomnographyPsychologyArousalAudiologySleep StagesSleep onsetSlow-wave sleepBody mass indexMedicineInternal medicineElectroencephalographyPsychiatryInsomniaNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction The odds ratio product (ORP) is a new highly-validated electroencephalogram biomarker of sleep depth. ORP has been validated as such by several studies investigating the effect of sleep disorders, responses to sleep deprivation and traffic noise. ORP during REM sleep varies considerably among individuals. Whether ORP reflects sleep depth also in REM sleep is unknown. We hypothesized that subjects with high REM ORP are more prone to REM sleep fragmentation. Methods Using data from the baseline (SHHS1; N=5,537) and follow-up (SHHS2; N=2,595) visits of the Sleep Heart Health Study, we calculated and summarized ORP in 30-second intervals corresponding to manually scored sleep stage epochs. We developed a heuristic to identify REM periods, defined as sequences of REM sleep epochs separated by no more than 10 minutes of other sleep stages or wake epochs. Using general linear models adjusted by age, sex, body mass index, race and ethnicity, we evaluated the relationship between REM ORP and total REM duration, number of awakening episodes per REM period and arousal index during REM sleep. Results Higher REM ORP was correlated with shorter total REM duration (ρ SHHS1=-0.12; p < 0.001, ρ SHHS2=-0.07; p < 0.001), more awakening episodes (ρ SHHS1=0.26; p<0.001, ρ SHHS2=0.30; p < 0.001) and higher arousal index (ρ SHHS1=0.18; p < 0.001, ρ SHHS2=0.16; p < < 0.001) during identified REM periods. In adjusted analyses, one-unit increase in REM ORP was associated, on average, with a 7 minute decrease in total REM duration (β=-7.10; p < 0.001), 1 more awakening episode per REM period (β=1.29; p < 0.001) and an increase of 6 arousals/hour (β=6.16; p < 0.001) during REM sleep periods. Conclusion We found that higher REM ORP was associated with shorter REM periods, higher proportion of awake during REM periods and higher REM arousal index. Although small, these differences suggest that ORP is consistent with the concept of sleep depth also during REM sleep. Support None

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and Work-Related FatigueFrench-language works237,207