The effects of Ramadan intermittent fasting on sleep-wake behaviour and daytime sleepiness in team sport referees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of Ramadan fasting on sleep quality and daytime sleepiness in team sport referees. Seventy-eight male amateur team sport referees (age: 31.1 ± 10.8 years) participated in this study. Participants responded to the Arabic version of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) questionnaires before (10-days prior) and during (last 7-days) the month of Ramadan.PSQI and ESS scores increased significantly during Ramadan (both p < .001, ES = 0.56 and 0.54, respectively) with 83.3% of participants scoring ≥5 in the PSQI. The percentage of participants suffering from severe excessive daytime sleepiness (ESS score ≥ 16) was 3.8% before vs. 7.7% during Ramadan (p < 0.001). Sleep duration decreased by ~ 1 h during Ramadan (p < .001, ES = 0.61) and was associated with a delay in bedtime of ~ 2 h (p < 0.001, ES = 0.7) and of wake-up time of ~ 1 h (p < 0.001, ES = 0.5). The score for daytime dysfunction and subjective sleep perception, as components of the PSQI, increased (both p < 0.001; ES = 0.79, ES = 0.57, respectively), whereas the score for the use of sleep medication decreased during vs. before Ramadan (p = 0.041, ES = 0.47). Ramadan fasting impaired sleep quality and increased daytime sleepiness in team sport referees. Future studies, using objective assessment tools, are warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".