MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394979013 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsae067.0430

0430 Odds Ratio Product as a Biological Marker of Hyperarousal in Insomnia with Short Sleep Duration

2024· article· en· W4394979013 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
KeywordsInsomniaOddsFight-or-flight responseOdds ratioSleep (system call)Duration (music)PsychologyMedicineClinical psychologyAudiologyPsychiatryInternal medicineLogistic regressionComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Odds-Ratio-Product (ORP) is an objective, continuous index of sleep depth and wake propensity ranging from 0 (very deep sleep) to 2.5 (full wakefulness) and measured in consecutive 3-second epochs. We investigated differences in ORP metrics in 69 insomnia patients with objectively short and normal sleep duration, and 50 controls. Methods Participants were recruited from the community and were screened with the Insomnia Severity Index and clinical interviews and assigned to either control or insomnia groups. Participants completed three nights of in-laboratory overnight polysomnography and the Odds Ratio Product (ORP) was computed from central EEG signals. Using average total sleep time (TST) of nights 2 and 3, patients with insomnia were divided into those with short sleep duration (< 6 hours; ISSD; n=20) or normal sleep duration (INSD, n=49). Percent of TRT spent in different ORP deciles was calculated along with average ORP over wake time (ORPWAKE, higher values reflect greater alertness), and NREM sleep (ORPNREM, higher values reflect lighter sleep). We also measured the frequency of wake intrusions (transient increases (>2.0) in ORP per hour of NREM sleep). Results Patients with ISSD had higher ORPwake than controls (p=.017) when controlling for age, spent more time in full wakefulness (decile 10, ORP>2.25) than the other groups (p<.001), less time in deep sleep (ORP< 0.5) than INSD (p=.018), and had a higher wake intrusion index than patients with INSD (p=.015). Absolute misperception of sleep onset latency was associated with ORPNREM (p=.003), ORPTRT (p=.008), and wake intrusions (p=.012) in ISSD, and ORPTRT (p=.009) and wake intrusions (p=.025) in controls, such that a greater degree of misperception was associated with elevated ORP and greater disruption to sleep. Conclusion Patients with insomnia and short sleep duration had evidence of physiological hyperarousal in EEG measured by ORP compared to controls and patients with insomnia and normal sleep duration. Sleep fragmentation, measured with ORP, was also associated with misperception of sleep onset latency in patients with short sleep duration and controls. These results can assist with the characterization of insomnia phenotypes. Differences in physiological hyperarousal within phenotypes of insomnia could suggest more targeted treatment pathways. 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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.266 · 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