MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394977443 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsae067.0427

0427 Assessment of First-Night Effect in Patients with Insomnia Using the Odds-Ratio-Product (ORP)

2024· article· en· W4394977443 on OpenAlexaff
Kari Lambing, Veronica Guadagni, Bethany Gerardy, Amy M. Bender, Magdy Younes, Célyne Bastien

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInsomniaOdds ratioOddsMedicinePsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicineLogistic regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Studies on first-night effect using conventional sleep metrics have been inconclusive. ORP is an objective index of sleep depth and wake propensity ranging from 0 (very deep sleep) to 2.5 (full wakefulness). ORP provides more in-depth information about sleep. We compared several ORP-derived metrics measured during three consecutive PSGs in patients with and without insomnia. Methods Participants (n=119) were screened with the Insomnia Severity Index and clinical interviews and assigned to either control (n=50) or insomnia (n=69) groups. Participants completed 3 nights of in-laboratory polysomnography. After each PSG, participants answered the question “How was your night in the lab compared to a night at home?” on a 1 (much better) to 5 (very mediocre) scale. The following variables were compared across the three nights with repeated-measures ANOVA. Questionnaire response (Q); average ORP during stages wake (ORPW), NREM (ORPNR) and REM (ORPREM) sleep; percent of recording time in deep sleep (ORP< 0.5) and in full wakefulness (ORP>2.25); average instantaneous difference between right and left ORP (R/L ORP difference), a measure of interhemispheric dissociation in sleep depth; frequency (hr-1) of transient increases (>2.0) in ORP during NREM sleep (WII); along with total sleep time (TST), % time awake (%wake), minutes in stages NREM3 (N3 time) and REM sleep (REM time); arousal index (AI). Results There were no differences between nights 2 and 3 in any variable. Q decreased beyond night-1, indicating improvement relative to home. The following significant changes were observed in night-2 in both insomnia and control groups (Tukey’s test): ORPNR and ORPREM decreased (deeper sleep); more time in deep sleep (ORP< 0.5) and less time in full-wakefulness (ORP>2.25); less WII. The following significant changes were observed in night-2 only in participants with insomnia: Lower ORPW, indicating less alertness during stage W, and less R/L ORP differences. TST marginally increased and N3 time and AI marginally decreased in insomnia while %wake decreased marginally in both groups. Conclusion This study demonstrated clear first-night effects in several EEG microstructure variables in both control and insomnia participants, while the latter also showed reduced alertness and improved R/L agreement in sleep depth beyond night-1. Support (if any)

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207