Associations between sleep trajectories up to 54 months and cognitive school readiness in 4 year old preschool children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study explores the association between the duration and variation of infant sleep trajectories and subsequent cognitive school readiness at 48-50 months. Methods: Participants were 288 multi-ethnic children, within the Growing Up in Singapore Towards healthy Outcomes (GUSTO) cohort. Caregiver-reported total, night and day sleep durations were obtained at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, 24 using the Brief Infant Sleep Questionnaire and 54 months using the Child Sleep Habits Questionnaire. Total, night and day sleep trajectories with varying durations (short, moderate, or long) and variability (consistent or variable; defined by standard errors) were identified. The cognitive school readiness test battery was administered when the children were between 48 and 50 months old. Both unadjusted adjusted analysis of variance models and adjusted analysis of covariance models (for confounders) were performed to assess associations between sleep trajectories and individual school readiness tests in the domains of language, numeracy, general cognition and memory. Results: In the unadjusted models, children with short variable total sleep trajectories had poorer performance on language tests compared to those with longer and more consistent trajectories. In both unadjusted and adjusted models, children with short variable night sleep trajectories had poorer numeracy knowledge compared to their counterparts with long consistent night sleep trajectories. There were no equivalent associations between sleep trajectories and school readiness performance for tests in the general cognition or memory domains. There were no significant findings for day sleep trajectories. Conclusion: Findings suggest that individual differences in longitudinal sleep duration patterns from as early as 3 months of age may be associated with language and numeracy aspects of school readiness at 48-50 months of age. This is important, as early school readiness, particularly the domains of language and mathematics, is a key predictor of subsequent academic achievement.
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 | 0.000 | 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".