MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4327684963 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2023.35

Evolution of Sleep Complaints in Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1: A 9-Year Longitudinal Study

2023· article· en· W4327684963 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Luc Laberge, Alexandre Maltais, Julie Auclair, Jean Mathieu, Cynthia Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-JeanUniversité de SherbrookeCégep de JonquièreUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMuscular Dystrophy Canada
KeywordsMyotonic dystrophyMedicineSleep (system call)AnesthesiaPediatricsInternal medicineExcessive daytime sleepinessPhysical therapyAudiologySleep disorderPsychiatryInsomnia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: The objective was to characterize the progression of sleep complaints in 115 dystrophy type 1 (DM1) patients who filled out a sleep questionnaire twice at a 9-year interval. Daytime napping (22.1% vs. 34.5%, p < 0.05), early awakenings (11.4% vs 21.1%, p < 0.05), nonrestorative sleep (39.5% vs 51.8%, p < 0.05), stimulant use (7.0% vs 19.3%, p < 0.01), breathing cessation (10.7% vs 23.2%, p < 0.01), and nighttime urination (42.5% vs 54.9%, p < 0.05) increased between Time 1 and Time 2. Sleep-related complaints are prominent and augment rapidly in DM1 patients. Physicians need to better identify and treat them to help alleviate the burden they impose on patients and their caregivers.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases→French-language works237,207→