Bifidobacterium longum 1714 improves sleep quality and aspects of well-being in healthy adults: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stress and sleep are linked with overall well-being. Bifidobacterium longum 1714 has been shown to influence stress responses and modulate neural responses during social stress, and influence sleep quality during examination stress in healthy adults. Here, we explored the ability of this strain to alter sleep quality in adults using subjective and objective measures. Eighty-nine adults (18-45y) with impaired sleep quality assessed with the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and with a global score ≥ 5 were randomized to receive B. longum 1714 or placebo daily for eight weeks. Assessing the effect of the strain on PSQI global score was the primary objective. Secondary objectives assessed sleep quality and well-being subjectively and sleep parameters using actigraphy objectively. While PSQI global score improved in both groups, B. longum 1714 significantly improved the PSQI component of sleep quality (p < 0.05) and daytime dysfunction due to sleepiness (p < 0.05) after 4 weeks and social functioning (p < 0.05) and energy/vitality (p < 0.05) after 8 weeks, compared to placebo. No significant effect on actigraphy measures were observed. The 1714 strain had a mild effect on sleep, demonstrated by a faster improvement in sleep quality at week 4 compared to placebo, although overall improvements after 8 weeks were similar in both groups. B. longum 1714 improved social functioning and increased energy/vitality in line with previous work that showed the strain modulated neural activity which correlated with enhanced vitality/reduced mental fatigue (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04167475).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".