Nocturnal sleep duration trajectories in early childhood and school performance at age 10 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sleep plays a fundamental role in brain development and resultant functions. The aim was to verify whether nocturnal sleep duration during early childhood has long-term associations with academic achievement at age 10 years. The present study is part of the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development, a representative cohort of infants born in 1997-1998 in the province of Quebec, Canada. Children with known neurological conditions were excluded from this cohort. Four trajectories of parent-reported nocturnal sleep duration at ages 2.5, 3, 4, 5 and 6 years were determined using a SAS procedure named PROC TRAJ. Sleep duration at age 10 years was also reported. Teachers provided data on academic performance when the children were age 10 years. These data were available for 910 children (430 boys, 480 girls; 96.6% Caucasians). Univariate and multivariable logistic regressions were performed using SPSS. Children who slept less than 8 hr per night at 2.5 years but normalized later on (Traj1) had three-five times the odds of having grades below the class average in reading, writing, mathematics and science compared with children who slept sufficiently (Traj3-4: 10-11 hr per night). Children who slept about 9 hr per night throughout childhood (Traj2) had two-three times the odds of being below the class average in mathematics and science. Sleep duration at age 10 years was not correlated with the academic performance. These results point to the presence of a very important early period during which sufficient sleep is needed to fine-tune the functions necessary for academic achievement later on.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".