MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323923869 · doi:10.1016/j.neurol.2022.12.009

Associations between self-reported sleep quality and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease

2023· article· en· W4323923869 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
João Durães, P. Marques, A.M. Novo, J. Facas, Diana Duro, Marisa Lima, Maria João Leitão, Miguel Tábuas‐Pereira, Inês Baldeiras, Isabel Santana

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Neurologique · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSanta Casa da Misericórdia de Lisboa
KeywordsPolysomnographyDementiaPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexInternal medicineCerebrospinal fluidMedicineAlzheimer's diseaseCognitionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentNeurodegenerationPsychologyDiseaseAudiologyPsychiatrySleep quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sleep disorders are very common in mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). Several parameters of polysomnography seem to correlate with cognitive scores and amyloid biomarkers in the different stages of AD. However, there is limited evidence for the relationship between self-reported sleep impairment and disease biomarkers. In this study, we assessed the relationship between self-reported sleep complaints, with the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and both cognitive function and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers in 70 patients with MCI and 78 patients with AD. Sleep duration and daytime dysfunction were higher in AD. Daytime dysfunction had a negative correlation with cognitive scores (Mini-Mental-State Examination and Montreal Cognitive Assessment) and with amyloid-beta1–42 protein, and a positive correlation with total tau protein. However, daytime dysfunction was an independent predictor only of t-tau values (F = 57.162; 95% CI: [18.118; 96.207], P = 0.004). These findings support a relationship between daytime dysfunction, cognitive scores and neurodegeneration, further expanding recent findings that it may signal a risk of dementia.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue NeurologiqueSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207