Insufficient Sleep and Behavioral Health in the Military: A 5-Country Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The goal of this paper was to highlight the degree to which sleep, behavioral health, and leader involvement were interrelated using data from militaries in five English-speaking countries: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the United States. RECENT FINDINGS: Many service members reported sleeping fewer than the recommended 7 h/night: 34.9%, 67.2%, and 77.2% of respondents from New Zealand, Canada, and the United States, respectively. Countries reporting shorter sleep duration also reported fewer insomnia-related difficulties, likely reflecting higher sleep pressure from chronic sleep loss. Across all countries, sleep problems were positively correlated with behavioral health symptoms. Importantly, leader promotion of healthy sleep was positively correlated with more sleep and negatively correlated with sleep problems and behavioral health symptoms. Insufficient sleep in the military is ubiquitous, with serious implications for the behavioral health and functioning of service members. Leaders should attend to these risks and examine ways to promote healthy sleep in service members.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".