MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390858960 · doi:10.1186/s13223-024-00874-y

Accelerometer-derived sleep metrics in mild and difficult-to-treat asthma

2024· letter· en· W4390858960 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Varun Sharma, Helen Clare Ricketts, Femke Steffensen, Anna Goodfellow, Duncan S. Buchan, Douglas C. Cowan

Bibliographic record

VenueAllergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAsthmaMedicineSleep (system call)AccelerometerPhysical therapyInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Poor sleep health is associated with increased asthma morbidity and mortality. Accelerometers have been validated to assess sleep parameters though studies using this method in patients with asthma are sparse and none have compared mild to difficult-to-treat asthma populations. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis from two recent in-house trials comparing sleep metrics between patients with mild and difficult-to-treat asthma. Participants wore accelerometers for 24-hours/day for seven days. RESULTS: Of 124 participants (44 mild, 80 difficult-to-treat), no between-group differences were observed in sleep-window, sleep-time, sleep efficiency or wake time. Sleep-onset time was ~ 40 min later in the difficult-to-treat group (p = 0.019). DISCUSSION: Broadly, we observed no difference in accelerometer-derived sleep-metrics between mild and difficult-to-treat asthma. This is the largest analysis of accelerometer-derived sleep parameters in asthma and the first comparing groups by asthma severity. Sleep-onset initiation may be delayed in difficult-to-treat asthma but a dedicated study is needed to confirm.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAllergy Asthma and Clinical Immunology→Same topicSleep and related disorders→French-language works237,207→