MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378610813 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsad077.0324

0324 Protective and Risk Factors for Insomnia Over 5 Years in a Population-Based Sample of Adults

2023· article· en· W4378610813 on OpenAlexaffabout
Charles M. Morin, Lydi‐Anne Vézina‐Im, Hans Ivers, Mélanie LeBlanc, Josée Savard

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaAnxietyMedicinePopulationBeck Depression InventoryPsychiatryMental healthPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexCohortPublic healthEpidemiologyState-Trait Anxiety InventoryClinical psychologyPsychologyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Insomnia is a major public health concern and one of the most prevalent health issues among adults. Identifying protective and risk factors for insomnia could help identify vulnerable populations and design public health interventions to prevent some adverse medical and mental health consequences. The study objective was to identify protective and risk factors for insomnia in a population-based sample of adults. Methods Data is from a large epidemiological cohort study on the natural course of insomnia conducted in Canada before the COVID-19 pandemic. Insomnia and potential protective and risk factors for insomnia were measured annually over 5 years with validated questionnaires (e.g., Insomnia Severity Index, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory, Perceived Stress Scale, Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations, Ford Insomnia Response to Stress Test, Arousal Predisposition Scale, Life Experiences Survey). Risk factors for insomnia were divided as predisposing or precipitating factors. Results From a cohort of 3,413 participants 1,709 adults were identified as good sleepers at baseline and were included in the analyses. A total of 202 people developed an insomnia syndrome during the 5-year follow-up. Using survival analysis for discrete events, the following variables were significant predisposing factors for insomnia: anxiety (HR=1.037; p=0.018), depression (HR=1.082; p< 0.001), perceived stress (HR=1.073; p< 0.001), number of negative life events (HR=1.478; p=0.02), perceived worse general health (HR=1.606; p=0.006), pain (HR=1.475; p=0.002), vulnerability to stress (HR=1.089; p< 0.001), and maladaptive emotional coping (HR=1.044; p< 0.001). The following variables were identified as precipitating factors for insomnia: loss of income (HR=1.346; p=0.03), increased anxiety (HR=1.070, p< 0.001), depression (HR=1.119; p< 0.001) and perceived stress (HR=1.083; p=0.001), decline in perceived general health (HR=2.061; p=0.006), and increased pain (HR=1.353; p=0.013). Physical activity was not a significant protective factor for insomnia (p=0.54). Conclusion These results provide new information that could be helpful to prevent the onset and chronicity of insomnia by targeting specific precipitating factors, and people with predisposing factors for insomnia. This is important as insomnia tends to be a persistent condition and is known to increase adverse medical and mental health outcomes. Support (if any) This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207