The influence of sleep and movement on mental health and life satisfaction during the transition to parenthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study assessed whether sleep and physical activity impact mental health and life satisfaction across the transition to parenthood. This study assessed the impact of parenthood on mental health of new parents and parents expecting their second child, and whether change in mental health occurred dyadically across couples. DESIGN: Longitudinal 12-month study. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and fifty-seven couples (N = 314) between the ages of 25 and 40, who were not expecting to have a child (n = 102), expecting their first child (n = 136), or expecting their second child (n = 76) were recruited. MEASUREMENTS: Participants completed measures at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months. Sleep was assessed with how often participants met sleep guidelines (7-9 hours). Physical activity was measured objectively via accelerometers. Mental health was measured using 6 items from the short form-12 Quality of Life Survey. Life satisfaction was assessed with the Satisfaction with Life Scale (5 items). RESULTS: Mental health was not predicted by physical activity but was predicted by sleep. Sleep at 6 months was positively related to mental health at 6 months (β = 0.156, p < .001), and sleep at 12 months was positively related to mental health at 12 months (β = 0.170, p < .001). The change in mental health did not occur dyadically: mental health increased for women but not for men across groups. Mental health was positively related to life satisfaction at 6 months (β = 0.338, p < .001) and 12-months (β = 0.277, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: For new and established parents, getting sufficient sleep plays an important role in mental health and, in turn, life satisfaction.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".