Self and parent‐reported sleep problems of adolescents with childhood conduct problems and comorbid psychological problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Childhood conduct problems (CP) are characterized by maladaptive externalizing behaviors and are linked with poor sleep. CP are highly comorbid with other psychological problems, including attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and depression, which are also associated with disturbed sleep. The present study examined if childhood CP and comorbid depressive and/or attentional-hyperactivity problems were prospectively associated with parent and self-reported sleep difficulties in adolescence. METHODS: Participants (N = 744; 53% boys) from an ongoing longitudinal study in Québec, Canada were assessed for CP and comorbidities when they were between 6 and 9 years old. Participants were classified as without CP, CP only, CP and depressive symptoms, CP and attention-hyperactivity problems, or CP, depressive symptoms, and attention-hyperactivity problems. Regressions were conducted to examine the associations between comorbidity groups, parent, and self-reported sleep problems 7 years later (Median age = 15.33 years), controlling for sex, age, family income, primary caregiver education and medication. RESULTS: Adolescents in all CP groups had higher self and parent-reported sleep problems compared to adolescents without histories of CP. Adolescents with histories of CP, depressive symptoms and attention-hyperactivity problems had more sleep problems than all other groups according to self-reports, but not parent-reports. CONCLUSION: Childhood CP was prospectively linked to sleep problems in adolescence, and comorbid conditions exacerbated these problems, according to youth but not parents.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".