MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281682058 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsac079.313

0315 Quantifying the Temporal Relationship Between Self-report Sleep Quality and Cognition in Older Adults

2022· article· en· W4281682058 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda Tapia, Lan Yu, Andrew Lim, Lisa L. Barnes, Martica H. Hall, Meryl A. Butters, Daniel J. Buysse, Meredith Wallace

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersAmerican Academy of Sleep Medicine Foundation
KeywordsCognitionPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexSleep (system call)PsychologyEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceClinical psychologyAudiologyMedicineSleep qualityPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Poor sleep is a promising modifiable risk factor for impaired cognition in older adults. However, the relationship between sleep and cognition is likely bi-directional, and few studies have examined these temporal associations. We seek to investigate the temporal relationships between self-report sleep quality and global cognition. Methods Our analytic sample includes 1,610 participants from the Memory and Aging Project and Minority Aging Research Study without cognitive impairment at the initial visit (41% black, 77% female, mean[min,max] age = 77[54,100] years). Participants have cognition and sleep quality measured at an initial visit and up to 14 years of annual follow-up (median 6 years). Sleep quality was measured using a modified 10-item Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index score (higher scores indicating worse quality) and standardized; global cognition was a composite z-score computed from an average of 19 cognitive tests. We used linear mixed effects models to quantify the concurrent and prospective (1-year) relationships of sleep quality and global cognition. Quadratic terms were also tested to allow for a potentially U-shaped relationship. Results When examining same-year associations with cognition as the outcome, sleep quality and cognition exhibit a negative quadratic association (linear term BL[p] = 0.01[0.021]; quadratic term BQ[p] = -0.01[0.051]), indicating that both better- and worse-than-average sleep quality are associated with lower cognition. Regarding 1-year associations, both better- and worse-than average sleep quality predict worse next-year global cognition (BL[p] = 0.01[0.008], BQ[p] = -0.01[0.033]). In contrast, better-than-average cognition predicts worse next-year sleep quality (B L[p] = 0.05[p=0.005]; BQ[p] = -0.01[0.650]) with a stronger association in this direction. Conclusion Understanding the temporal association between sleep and cognition has important implications for screening and development of novel treatments and interventions. The finding that both better and worse sleep quality are associated with worse cognition may reflect an underreporting of poor sleep symptoms in older adults with worsened cognition. Future work will examine these associations considering specific domains of self-report sleep (e.g., timing, efficiency, duration) and cognitive function (memory and perception), consider mechanisms relating sleep and cognition, and use objective measures of sleep (e.g., actigraphy). Support (If Any) RF1AG056331 (PI: Wallace), R01AG17917, R01AG22018

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207