Sleep structure assessed by objective measurement in patients with mild cognitive impairment: A meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: A meta-analysis was used to explore the characteristic changes in objective sleep structure of patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) compared with cognitively healthy older adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, EMBAS, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched until November 2023. A literature quality evaluation was performed according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and a meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: Fifteen studies with 771 participants were finally included. Compared with normal control groups, patients with MCI had a decreased total sleep time by 34.44 min, reduction in sleep efficiency by 7.96 %, increased waking after sleep onset by 19.61 min, and increased sleep latency by 6.97 min. Ten included studies showed that the patients with MCI had increased N1 sleep by 2.72 % and decreased N3 sleep by 0.78 %; however, there was no significant difference between the MCI and control groups in percentage of N2 sleep. Moreover, Twelve included studies reported the MCI groups had shorter REM sleep of 2.69 %. CONCLUSION: Our results provide evidence of abnormal sleep architecture in patients with MCI. As a "plastic state," abnormal sleep architecture may be a promising therapeutic target for slowing cognitive decline and dementia prevention.
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 | 0.011 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.046 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".