MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3031538641 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsaa056.917

0921 Insomnia in Adolescents: Patient-Centered Outcomes and Perspectives

2020· article· en· W3031538641 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah M. Honaker, Stacey L. Simon, Kelly C. Byars, Danielle M. Graef, Ariel A. Williamson, Lisa J. Meltzer

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChild Nutrition and Feeding Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaWorryPsychiatryMoodMedicineClinical psychologySleep disorderPsychologyAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction An estimated 25-40% of adolescents endorse symptoms of insomnia. While research has demonstrated that insomnia is associated with impaired functioning, little is known regarding which insomnia symptoms or outcomes are most burdensome for adolescents. Patient-centered outcomes (PCO) are clinical and research questions and outcomes that are meaningful to patients. This study is the first to evaluate PCOs in adolescents with insomnia. Methods We conducted an online survey of adolescents in the USA, UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand who were 13 - 18 years old and reported experiencing one or more insomnia symptoms. Participants were recruited using targeted advertising on Facebook. Participants reported on insomnia symptom severity, frequency, and duration, help-seeking behavior, areas of insomnia-related impairment, and research priorities. Results Of the N=3034 respondents, 99.3% (n=3014) met inclusion criteria. Participants were predominantly female (77.0%) and white non-Hispanic (70.8%), with a mean age of 16.1 years (SD=1.3). Most (87.5%) met DSM-V diagnostic criteria for insomnia, yet only 29.3% reported seeking professional help. Over half (52.1%) reported a symptom duration of three or more years. Insomnia symptoms reported were sleep initiation difficulties (94.4%), sleep fragmentation (65.3%), premature awakening (54.5%), and difficulty sleeping independently (22.3%). The most burdensome areas of insomnia-related impairment were reported to be mood (72.2%), attentional focus (61.0%), pain (49.7%), worry (46.3%) and sleepiness (38.7%). Adolescents with insomnia most frequently endorsed the following research priorities: causes of insomnia (66.4%), early detection (66.1%), public education about sleep (49.1%) and non-pharmacological treatments (48.3%). Conclusion Adolescents with insomnia report significant insomnia-related distress and impairment, with symptoms often persisting for three or more years. However, adolescents with insomnia often do not seek professional help. Areas perceived as most problematic to adolescents living with insomnia (e.g., mood, focus, pain) should be considered as important outcomes for insomnia researchers. Support This publication was made possible with support from Grant Number UL1TR002529 (A Shekhar, PI) from the National Institutes of Health, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, Clinical and Translational Sciences Award and the Indiana University School of Medicine.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicChild Nutrition and Feeding IssuesFrench-language works237,207