MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159372525 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsab072.645

647 Adolescent and Young Adult Sleep and Sleep-Related Behaviour Change During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2021· article· en· W3159372525 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nicole E. Carmona, Colleen E. Carney

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSleep (system call)EveningYoung adultSleep disorderPsychological interventionMorningPsychologyMedicineSleep deprivationActigraphyGerontologyInsomniaPsychiatryCognitionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Sleep disturbance, poor sleep quality, and dissatisfaction with sleep are common among adolescents and young adults (AYAs; e.g., Becker et al., 2018; Hicks et al., 2002; Hysing et al., 2013). Environmental and behavioural factors (e.g., early school start times, evening technology use and social pressures) are barriers to healthy sleep among AYAs that contribute to a “perfect storm” of sleep disturbance during this period (Carskadon, 2011; Crowley et al., 2018). Notwithstanding, few AYAs have access to sleep treatments. The COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns decreased academic and scheduling demands, providing an opportunity to study unconstrained AYA sleep and potentially facilitating better access to sleep interventions (Simpson & Manber, 2020). This study evaluated differences in baseline sleep and sleep-related behaviour change (i.e., how AYAs use an evidence-based app for sleep disturbance) before vs. during the lockdown. Methods Participants between the ages of 15 and 24 (M=20.66, SD=2.38) completed a 4-week feasibility study evaluating a free, transdiagnostic sleep self-management app (DOZE) before the lockdown (“Pre-Lockdown”; n=51) or during the lockdown (“Lockdown”; n=29). After 2 weeks of completing baseline sleep diaries, participants could set goals based on feedback and access tips, followed by 2 more weeks of completing sleep diaries. Results Compared to Pre-Lockdown, Lockdown demonstrated less variability in their sleep schedules (ps≤.011), less napping (p=.002), but increased time in bed (TIB; p<.001) and total wake time (p=.007). Total sleep time, lingering in bed in the morning, and sleep efficiency did not differ between groups. Relative to Pre-Lockdown, Lockdown showed a greater tendency to set goals to reduce schedule variability (p=.010) and to restrict excessive TIB (p=.005). Rates of goal setting for lingering in bed in the morning, sleepiness, naps, and sleep-interfering substance use did not differ between groups. Rates of accessing tips did not differ between groups. Conclusion Effects of COVID-19 lockdown on AYA sleep included less variability in their schedule and a decreased need for naps, but negative effects on TWT and TIB. As a result, AYAs set different goals during the COVID-19 lockdowns, focusing more on restricting excessive TIB than on schedule variability. Support (if any) Canadian Institutes of Health Research eHealth Innovation Partnership Program (#143551).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207