Sleep and insulin sensitivity in adolescents at risk of type 2 diabetes: the Sleep Manipulation in Adolescents at Risk of Type 2 Diabetes randomized crossover study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of increasing sleep duration for 1 week, compared to a week of habitual and decreased sleep, on insulin sensitivity (IS) in adolescents at risk for type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: Adolescents, 13-18 years old, at risk for T2D, with obesity and other risk factors, were recruited for a randomized (1:1), open-label, sex-stratified crossover study, that manipulated time-in-bed to modify sleep duration (measured by actigraphy). Following a week of habitual (HB) sleep, time-in-bed was increased (IN) and decreased (DE) by 1 hour 30 min/night for 1 week, counterbalanced across participants (HBINDE or HBDEIN), and separated by a week of washout sleep. The main outcome measure was IS, obtained via 2-hour oral-glucose-tolerance-test conducted after each sleep week. RESULTS: Of the 43 participants recruited, 36 (84%) completed all sleep interventions (52.8% female, age = 15.1 years, body mass index = 99.9th percentile, order: HBINDE = 18 and HBDEIN = 18). On average, during the HB week, participants slept 7 hours 31 min/night; sleep duration was 1 hour 02 min/night higher during the IN week and 1 hour 19 min/night lower during the DE week. We found a significant effect of sleep week on IS with a large effect size. Following the IN sleep week, IS was 20% higher compared to after the HB and DE sleep weeks, but there was no significant difference in IS following HB versus DE sleep weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Whenever possible, clinicians should empower youth at risk of T2D to improve their sleep duration, since even a modest increase in sleep duration of 1 h/night for 1 week can have a positive impact on IS in this population. CLINICAL TRIALS: Sleep Extension and IS in Adolescents, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03754036, November 23rd, 2018. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (ID:NCT03754036).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".