MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390055086 · doi:10.1111/jsr.14124

Evaluating the effect of preoperative interventions on sleep health in the perioperative period: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4390055086 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Sibley, Daniel Sellers, Ian Randall, Marina Englesakis, S. Nicole Culos‐Reed, Mandeep Singh, Daniel Santa Mina

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sleep Research · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryYork UniversityUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerioperativePeriod (music)Psychological interventionMedicineSleep (system call)Systematic reviewPsychologyAnesthesiaMEDLINEPsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surgery and general anaesthesia have deleterious effects on sleep and disrupted perioperative sleep health is a risk factor for poor surgical outcomes. The objective of this systematic review was to summarise preoperative interventions that report sleep outcomes. Studies that delivered an intervention initiated >24 h prior to surgery among an adult sample without a diagnosed sleep disorder were included. Studies were excluded if they were preclinical or were not published in English. MEDLINE, MEDLINE ePubs Ahead of Print and In-process Citations, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, APA PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Web of Science were searched on February 2, 2023. This review was reported in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (identifier: CRD42021260578). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of Bias 2 tool for randomised trials and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions for non-randomised trials. Certainty of findings were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. The searching yielded 10,938 total citations, and after screening resulted in 28 randomised and 19 non-randomised trials (47 total) with 4937 participants. Sleep was a primary outcome in 16 trials; a sleep outcome was significantly improved relative to comparator in 23 trials. This review demonstrates that preoperative sleep is modifiable via a variety of interventions, including pharmacological, non-pharmacological, and nursing interventions delivered preoperatively or perioperatively. Our results should be considered with caution due to an overall intermediate to high risk of bias in the included trials, and low to very low certainty of evidence. This review supports the modifiability of sleep health among surgical patients and provides the groundwork for preoperative sleep optimisation 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)0.053
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0530.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.005
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 head0.345
GPT teacher head0.607
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sleep ResearchSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207