MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378611487 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsad077.0677

0677 Blunted daily light rhythm amplitude in adults with opioid use disorder (OUD)

2023· article· en· W4378611487 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca Cox, Sophie Haller, Zofia Martinez-Lisowska, Abhignya Kuppa, Kate E. Sprecher, Dana Withrow, Declan T. Barry, Dustin Scheinost, Nancy S. Redeker, H. Klar Yaggi, Kenneth P. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsEVERSANA (Canada)
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institutes of HealthVirginia Commonwealth University
KeywordsCircadian rhythmAnalysis of varianceOpioid use disorderInternal medicineMedicineRepeated measures designRhythmChronobiologyActigraphyOpioidPsychologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Accumulating evidence implicates sleep and circadian rhythm disruption in substance use disorders, including opioid use disorder (OUD). Blunted amplitude in daily rhythms of circadian-relevant variables (e.g., activity, light) may be a marker of psychopathology, as depressed adults demonstrate a smaller activity amplitude compared with healthy controls. The present study compared the light and activity amplitudes of adults with OUD with healthy controls. Methods Light and activity data were collected from adults with OUD who were recently stabilized on medication-assisted treatment (N=27; Mage=44.25±13.21). Participants wore an Actiwatch for an average of 14.5 (SD=4.14) days. Light and activity data collected from healthy adults (N=15; Mage=22.88±2.76) who wore an Actiwatch an average of 11.59 (SD=1.07) days in a separate study were included as a comparison group. Light and activity amplitudes for each day and a composite amplitude for the sampling period were calculated using non-orthogonal spectral analysis. Results Results of mixed model ANOVA with subject as a random factor and group and day as fixed factors revealed a significant main effect of group on daily light amplitude (p<.01), such that the OUD group exhibited lower daily light amplitudes compared to healthy controls, and a trend-level main effect of group on daily activity amplitude (p=.09), such that the OUD group exhibited lower daily activity amplitudes compared to healthy controls. With age included as a covariate in the model, the main effect of group on light remained significant, whereas the trend-level effect on activity became non-significant. Results of between-subjects t-tests indicated significantly lower composite light and activity amplitudes during the entire sampling period in the OUD group compared to healthy controls (p’s<.05). Conclusion These findings indicate that OUD is characterized by blunted light amplitude, which could both reflect and contribute to disruptions in circadian physiology in OUD. Light amplitude may be a novel target for behavioral OUD interventions. Future research is needed to determine whether blunted light amplitude is associated with OUD treatment outcomes and to further examine activity amplitude in OUD with larger sample sizes. Support (if any) U01 HL150596; T32 HL149646; CTSA Grant UL1 TR002535; Office of Naval Research MURI N00014-15-1-2809

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207