Research Protocol for Sleep in Families With a Preterm Infant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Specificities regarding the quality and quantity of sleep of preterm infants and their parents following discharge of the preterm infant from the hospital are not well known. Given this lack of knowledge, the links between the sleep characteristics of these parents, family functioning, and their psychological well-being are also unclear. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this article is to summarize the research protocol of a cross-sectional, mixed-methods, convergent design study, which aims to evaluate the sleep patterns of preterm infants and both their parents and document the associations between sleep quality, parents' psychological well-being, and family functioning during the posthospitalization period. METHODS: A convenience sample is used to recruit 30 families. For quantitative data collection, a questionnaire booklet consisting of validated questionnaires is used to measure sleep quality of each family member, parental psychological well-being, and family functioning completed by each parent. An actigraph and a sleep diary measure sleep quantity of each parent and the preterm infant. Afterward, semistructured interviews are carried out with each parent to explore their perceptions and needs concerning their infant's and their own sleep quality. For data analysis, qualitative and quantitative data are analyzed separately and then merged to allow for an integrative interpretation of the results. RESULTS: The research project is ongoing; 25 of 30 families have completed the data collection. Data analysis is underway. DISCUSSION: This research will provide a global portrait of the families' sleep 1 month after the preterm infant is discharged from the hospital, which is not well known to date. The results will help healthcare providers involved with preterm infants and their families after discharge from the hospital to increase their comprehension of the families' reality and adapt their interventions to meet these needs.
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 | 0.075 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.130 | 0.042 |
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".