MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157426402 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsab072.534

536 Is mothers’ perceived pressure associated with infant sleep-related parenting practices?

2021· article· en· W3157426402 on OpenAlexaffabout
Émilie M Lannes, Samantha Kenny, Rebecca Burdayron, Karine Dubois‐Comtois, Marie‐Julie Béliveau, Marie‐Hélène Pennestri

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInfant Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyBreastfeedingQuarter (Canadian coin)MedicinePediatricsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Studies suggest that feeling pressure about parenting practices is related to higher levels of stress. However, little is known about the pressure mothers feel about infant sleep-related parenting practices. This is surprising, considering that mothers are often exposed to contradictory information about infant sleep. This exploratory study aimed to 1) identify the proportion of mothers of 6-month-old infants who report feeling pressure about their sleep-related parenting practices and 2) assess the relationships between demographic factors and perceived pressure, and between parenting practices and perceived pressure. Methods Fifty-four mothers of 6-month-old infants completed a demographic questionnaire and the Sleep Practices Questionnaire (SPQ). Mothers were asked, “Have you ever felt pressure about your parenting choices and practices related to your child’s sleep?”. Responses ranged from never to always. Linear regressions were conducted to assess the concurrent associations between demographic factors (maternal age, maternal education, parity) and perceived pressure, and between sleep-related parenting practices (feeding method, frequency of bed-sharing, picking up or not picking up the infant when he/she cries at night) and perceived pressure. Results Analyses revealed that 5.6% of mothers reported feeling pressure constantly, 20.4% reported feeling pressure quite often, 46.3% reported feeling pressure sometimes, and about a quarter (27.7%) reported feeling pressure rarely or never. Lower maternal education and breastfeeding were associated with feeling more pressure about sleep-related parenting practices (p < .05). Furthermore, mothers reporting that they (or their partner) pick up their infant when he/she cries at night were more likely to report feeling pressure (p < .01). Maternal age, parity, and frequency of bed-sharing were not associated with feeling pressure (p > .05). Conclusion The majority of mothers (72.3%) in our sample reported feeling pressure about their sleep-related parenting practices at least sometimes, suggesting that this experience is quite common. Lower maternal education, breastfeeding, and picking up the infant to comfort him/her during the night were associated with higher perceived pressure. Future studies should examine feelings of pressure about sleep-related parenting practices in larger samples of mothers and investigate whether fathers share similar concerns. Moreover, identifying the potential sources of these feelings would represent an interesting clinical avenue. Support (if any) SSHRC, FRQS

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.329 · 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.

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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicInfant Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207