082 The Association Between Excessive Daytime Sleepiness and Math Performance in Adolescents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is defined as an increased tendency to fall asleep in a setting where an individual would be expected to stay awake and alert. Previous studies have found that EDS is associated with poor academic performance but fell short of examining the associations between EDS and achievement in specific academic subjects. Academic performance in mathematics is the most prominent predictor of later success. Findings from studies examining the associations of academic achievement in math and EDS have been inconsistent as some studies have found results indicating the EDS negatively impacts math while others found no such relationship. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between EDS and performance in mathematics in high school students. It was hypothesized that higher level of reported EDS would be associated with lower grades in mathematics. Methods 116 typically developing adolescents (38 male) between 12–17 years of age (M=13.87, SD=1.38) participated. EDS was measured by the Sleep Disorder Inventory for Students (SDIS); Academic achievement in mathematics was measured by child’s report cards; Sleep was assessed for seven nights using actigraphy and sleep logs. Results A hierarchical multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine the associations between parent-reported EDS (independent variable) and their child’s academic achievement in mathematics (dependent variable) while controlling for sleep variables (bedtime, waketime, and duration) and sex. Higher levels of EDS was negatively associated with lower grades in mathematics [F(5,109)= 3.60, p<.01; β= -0.21, p= 0.03]. Conclusion EDS was significantly associated with report card grades in mathematics in typically developing adolescents. Given the cross-sectional design of the study, it can not identify what led to EDS in this sample of typically developing adolescents. We propose that future studies examine potential causes for adolescents’ EDS, including factors that could impair sleep quality (e.g., undiagnosed sleep disorders) or restrict sleep duration (e.g., life-style choices such as the use of electronic devices at night). This is important as it could help to identify targets for intervention aiming at decreasing EDS and ultimately improving academic performance in mathematics. Support (if any):
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".