MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117255606 · doi:10.2196/22498

Gender Differences in Adolescent Sleep Disturbance and Treatment Response to Smartphone App–Delivered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia: Exploratory Study

2020· article· en· W3117255606 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sophie Li, Bronwyn M. Graham, Aliza Werner‐Seidler

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexSleep disorderSleep (system call)Sleep onsetActigraphyPsychologyWakefulnessCognitive behavioral therapy for insomniaCognitive behavioral therapyClinical psychologyMedicineCognitionPhysical therapySleep qualityPsychiatryElectroencephalography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Insomnia and sleep disturbance are pervasive and debilitating conditions affecting up to 40% of adolescents. Women and girls are at greater risk of insomnia, yet differences in treatment responsiveness between genders have not been adequately investigated. Additionally, while women report greater symptom severity and burden of illness than men, this discrepancy requires further examination in adolescents. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine gender differences in sleep symptom profiles and treatment response in adolescents. METHODS: Digital cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) treatment responsiveness, as indexed by changes in Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) and Global Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) scores, was compared in boys and girls (aged 12-16 years; N=49) who participated in a pilot evaluation of the Sleep Ninja smartphone app. Gender differences in self-reported baseline insomnia symptom severity (ISI), sleep quality (PSQI), and sleep characteristics derived from sleep diaries were also examined. RESULTS: Compared with boys, we found that girls reported greater symptom severity (P=.04) and nighttime wakefulness (P=.01 and P=.04) and reduced sleep duration (P=.02) and efficiency (P=.03), but not poorer sleep quality (P=.07), more nighttime awakenings (P=.16), or longer time to get to sleep (P=.21). However, gender differences in symptom severity and sleep duration were accounted for by boys being marginally younger in age. Treatment response to CBT-I was equivalent between boys and girls when comparing reductions in symptom severity (P=.32); there was a trend showing gender differences in improvements in sleep quality, but this was not statistically significant (P=.07). CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the presence of gender differences in insomnia symptoms and severity in adolescents and suggest further research is required to understand gender differences in insomnia symptom profiles to inform the development of gender-specific digital interventions delivered to adolescents.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations35
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative ResearchSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207