MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390197083 · doi:10.1002/alz.081838

Sleep Quality and Day‐to‐Day Variability: Relation to Alzheimer’s pathology in Cognitively Unimpaired Older Adults At‐Risk of AD Dementia

2023· article· en· W4390197083 on OpenAlexaff
Béry Mohammediyan, Andrée‐Ann Baril, Frédéric St‐Onge, Valentin Ourry, Julie Carrier, John C.S. Breitner, Judes Poirier, Sylvia Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActigraphyPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexSleep (system call)DementiaMedicineLongitudinal studyAlzheimer's diseaseCircadian rhythmPsychologyInternal medicineAudiologyCognitionDiseasePathologySleep qualityPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Increasing evidence suggests a link between sleep and late‐life Alzheimer disease’s (AD) pathology. We investigated whether sleep degradation might be accompanied by faster AD pathology accumulation and/or whether early AD pathologic changes might be accompanied by sleep changes before the onset of cognitive symptoms. Method We investigated 228 PREVENT‐AD participants with available sleep data who underwent Aβ, [18F] NAV‐4694, and tau,[18F] Flortaucipir, positron emission tomography (PET). Longitudinal subjective sleep quality data were available for 191 participants (follow‐up:1.03±0.19y), longitudinal objective sleep data measured with actigraphy was available for 152 participants (follow‐up:2.5±1.24y), and longitudinal PET scans were available for 104 participants (follow‐up:4.3±0.24y). We assessed sleep quality using the Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) global score along with 7‐day actigraphy to indicate sleep duration, efficiency, and fragmentation index. Daily variation in sleep was measured using cross‐sectional and longitudinal standard deviations across the 7 days of actigraphy. Linear mixed effect models tested for longitudinal association of baseline sleep measures with PET outcomes over time. We also examined whether an increase in PET AD tracer uptake predicted changes in sleep quality and day‐to‐day variability. Every model controlled for age and sex. Result We found no association between sleep measures and Aβ PET. Higher baseline PSQI scores were associated with higher levels of tau over time (p = 0.004, R2 = 0.034, 𝛽 = 0.007, Fig.1, A). Higher baseline variability of sleep duration and fragmentation index were also associated with higher levels of tau longitudinally (p = 0.001, R2 = 0.05, 𝛽 = 0.001, Fig.1, B; p = 0.029, R2 = 0.022, 𝛽 = 0.01; Fig.1, C). Furthermore, increased tau at baseline was associated with lower sleep quality (p = 0.006, R2 = 0.026, 𝛽 = 4.12, Fig.2, A), and with higher sleep duration variability over time (p = 0.004, R2 = 0.06, 𝛽 = 61.56, Fig.1, B.) Conclusion Poor sleep quality and higher day‐to‐day sleep variability in older age could contribute to faster rate of tau pathology accumulation, which could in turn disrupt sleep further. Targeting sleep disturbances may therefore serve in delaying tau burden and slowing down disease progression.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicSleep and related disorders→French-language works237,207→