Exploratory study of the effects of sex and hormonal contraceptives on alertness, fatigue, and sleepiness of police officers on rotating shifts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Study Objectives: This exploratory study assessed the impact of sex and hormonal contraceptives (HC) use on the homeostatic and diurnal variation of alertness, fatigue, sleepiness, psychomotor performance, and sleep behavior in police officers working rotating shifts. Methods: A total of 56 men and 20 women (6 using, 11 not using, and 3 with unknown use of HC) participated in an observational study throughout a month-long work cycle. Participants wore an actigraph, filled out a sleep and work log, answered questionnaires (Samn-Perelli, KSS, Visual Analogue Scales), and completed 5-min Psychomotor Vigilance Tasks (PVT) according to an ecological momentary assessment approach. Linear mixed-effects models were used to analyze the effects of group (men, women, and HC use), time awake, and time of day on the dependent variables. Results: Self-reported parameters and performance significantly varied with time awake and time of day. Women were more fatigued and sleepier than men, when considering both time awake and time of day. Compared to men, women using HC were more fatigued, less alert, and sleepier. Women had less attention lapses than men after 7 and 17 h awake, although no main effect of HC was detected. Conclusions: Women tended to rate themselves as more fatigued than men, especially when using HC. Surprisingly, psychomotor performances of women were sometimes better than those of men. This exploratory study indicates that sex and HC are important factors to consider in occupational medicine.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".