MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378611749 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsad077.0775

0775 Differences in subjective sleep measures in mothers and fathers of premature infants: A preliminary study

2023· article· en· W4378611749 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Ramos Socarras, Valérie Lebel, Geneviève Forest

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersCincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center
KeywordsSleep (system call)Duration (music)NocturnalPsychologyAnalysis of varianceMedicinePediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction It has been documented that newborn’s sleep is strongly associated with maternal and paternal sleep. However, mothers seem to be more affected by their infant’s sleep than fathers. These associations are not well known in families of premature newborns yet. This was the objective of the present study. Methods 30 families of premature newborns (mothers, fathers and infants) participated in this study one month after discharge from the hospital. Parents completed, among other measures, sleep diaries during three consecutive weekdays for themselves and their child. Multiple linear regression analyses were computed to examine the association between sleep duration and nocturnal awakenings of the premature infant and their mothers’ and fathers’ sleep duration and number of awakenings during the night. Analyses were done separately for mothers and fathers. Results Regression models for parents’ sleep duration were significant and explained 31.7% of the variance in mothers’ sleep duration (p=.009) and 30.8% of the variance in fathers’ sleep duration (p=.01). Infants’ sleep duration was the only significant predictor in both models (□=.663, p=.005 and □=.670, p=.005, respectively for mothers and fathers). Thus, shorter sleep duration in premature infants predicted shorter sleep duration in mothers and fathers. Analyses of parents’ nocturnal awakenings showed that the model was significant for mothers (p<.001), but not for fathers (p=.372). The variables explained 73.4% of the variance in mothers’ awakenings, and infants’ nocturnal awakenings was the only significant predictor (□=.801, p<.001). Conclusion Our results suggest that premature infants’ sleep is strongly associated with mothers and fathers’ sleep. In addition, it seems that nocturnal awakenings are particularly associated with the mothers, but not the fathers’ awakenings during the night, which may be related to their involvement in feeding schedules during the night. Future studies should focus on sleep disturbances in families of preterm infants and on interventions targeted for both mothers and fathers that can be implemented to improve sleep in this population. Support (if any)

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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207