Children’s Sleep During COVID-19: How Sleep Influences Surviving and Thriving in Families
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to disrupt the lives of families and may have implications for children with existing sleep problems. As such, we aimed to: (1) characterize sleep changes during the COVID-19 pandemic in children who had previously been identified as having sleep problems, (2) identify factors contributing to sleep changes due to COVID-19 safety measures, and (3) understand parents' and children's needs to support sleep during the pandemic. METHODS: Eighty-five Canadian parents with children aged 4-14 years participated in this explanatory sequential, mixed-methods study using an online survey of children's and parents' sleep, with a subset of 16 parents, selected based on changes in their children's sleep, participating in semi-structured interviews. Families had previously participated in the Better Nights, Better Days (BNBD) randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: While some parents perceived their child's sleep quality improved during the COVID-19 pandemic (14.1%, n = 12), many parents perceived their child's sleep had worsened (40.0%, n = 34). Parents attributed children's worsened sleep to increased screen time, anxiety, and decreased exercise. Findings from semi-structured interviews highlighted the effect of disrupted routines on sleep and stress, and that stress reciprocally influenced children's and parents' sleep. CONCLUSIONS: The sleep of many Canadian children was affected by the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, with the disruption of routines influencing children's sleep. eHealth interventions, such as BNBD with modifications that address the COVID-19 context, could help families address these challenges.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".