MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Correlation between spatial memory and sleep architecture and hippocampal volumes in patients with chronic insomnia disorder

2017· article· en· W3031161792 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Weiwei Huang, Xin Lyu, Shanshan Lu, Juanjuan Xu, Yuan Gao, Xiaomin Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueChin J Neurol · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaPolysomnographyPrimary InsomniaPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexEpworth Sleepiness ScaleAudiologyPsychologyHippocampusInternal medicineMedicineSleep disorderPsychiatryElectroencephalographySleep quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To investigate the correlation between spatial memory and sleep architecture and hippocampal volumes in patients with chronic insomnia disorder. Methods Twenty-two chronic insomnia patients and 17 normal sleepers (controls) were selected to evaluate the subjective insomnia using Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) and the objective insomnia by polysomnography (PSG). The cognitive function was measured by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Spatial memory and object-memory were measured by Nine-box Maze, and object-recognition memory was detected by picture recognition test. MRI was used to detect hippocampus volumes. Results Compared with controls, a significant reduction in total sleep time (328.3 (310.4, 387.9) min vs 418.0 (375.8, 45.5) min, Z=2.607, P=0.009), sleep efficiency (%) (77.7 (73.1, 84.0) vs 93.0 (87.2, 93.9), Z=3.739, P=0.000), proportion of N3 (%) (5.5 (0.4, 14.4) vs 13.7 (7.7, 18.3), Z=2.664, P=0.008) and proportion of rapid eye movement (REM) (%) (14.4 (10.7, 17.2) vs 17.3 (15.9, 23.3), Z=2.890, P=0.004) was seen in insomnia patients, whereas sleep latency was delayed. The error numbers of spatial working-memory (4.5 (2.0, 7.3) vs 1.0 (0.0, 3.0), Z=3.007, P=0.003) in chronic insomnia patients were more than those in controls. There was no statistically significant difference in object reference memory, spatial reference memory and object recognition in two groups. A significant reduction of the left (2 818.0 (2 534.9, 3 191.8) mm3vs 3 453.3 (3 081.2, 3 764.4) mm3,Z=3.314, P=0.001), right (2 780.5 (2 451.2, 3 191.8) mm3vs 3 479.8 (3 024.1, 3 786.7) mm3,Z=3.484, P=0.000) and whole hippocampal volumes (5 561.7 (4 956.6, 6 396.9) mm3vs 6 898.9 (6 017.1, 7 540.1) mm3,Z=3.455, P=0.001) was seen in chronic insomnia patients compared with controls. The hippocampal volumes were negatively correlated with sleep latency (r=-0.432, P=0.006), but positively correlated with sleep efficiency, proportion of N3 (r=0.323, 0.376; P=0.045, 0.018). There was a negative correlation between the error numbers of spatial working-memory and hippocampal volumes (r=-0.351, P=0.029). The hippocampal volumes were negatively correlated with the duration of disease in chronic insomnia patients (r=-0.734, P<0.01). Conclusion The spatial memory may be associated with decreased proportion of REM and reduced hippocampal volumes in chronic insomnia patients. Key words: Sleep disorders; Spatial memory; Polysomnography; Hippocampus

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChin J NeurolSame topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207