MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Postpartum Sleep

2013· book· en· W4254184959 on OpenAlexaff
Robyn Stremler

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2013
Typebook
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSleep (system call)Psychological interventionPostpartum depressionPsychologyPostpartum periodInsomniaSleep patternsDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyMedicinePsychiatryPregnancyMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sleep for parents in the first postpartum year is affected by nighttime care of and interactions with the infant. Women experience decreases in subjective sleep quality and increased nighttime awakenings. Limited research on fathers’ sleep in the postpartum suggests they too undergo changes in their sleep, but to a lesser degree. Decisions around infant feeding and sleep location, and parent cognitions related to infant sleep, have effects on parental sleep in the postpartum but more research is needed to elucidate these relationships. Much of the evidence that interventions to improve infant sleep result in improvements in parental sleep is limited by methodological problems, and evaluations of interventions aimed at improving parental sleep are few. This chapter examines what is known about the quality and quantity of sleep for parents in the postpartum and the factors that influence parental sleep. Parental interactions with the infant with effects on parental sleep are discussed, including feeding method, infant sleep location, responses to nighttime infant needs, and parent cognitions around sleep. Postpartum depression, decreased relationship satisfaction, and postpartum weight retention are explored as consequences of disturbed sleep. Finally, evidence of effectiveness of interventions to improve sleep for parents in the postpartum is summarized, and recommendations for future research are proposed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1010.050

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooks→Same topicSleep and related disorders→French-language works237,207→