MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399526387 · doi:10.2196/51585

Sleep Health Analysis Through Sleep Symptoms in 35,808 Individuals Across Age and Sex Differences: Comparative Symptom Network Study

2024· article· en· W4399526387 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christophe Gauld, Sarah Hartley, Jean‐Arthur Micoulaud‐Franchi, Sylvie Royant‐Parola

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentralitySleep (system call)PsychologyClinical psychologyMedicineStatisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Sleep health is a multidimensional construct that includes objective and subjective parameters and is influenced by individual sleep-related behaviors and sleep disorders. Symptom network analysis allows modeling of the interactions between variables, enabling both the visualization of relationships between different factors and the identification of the strength of those relationships. Given the known influence of sex and age on sleep health, network analysis can help explore sets of mutually interacting symptoms relative to these demographic variables. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to study the centrality of symptoms and compare age and sex differences regarding sleep health using a symptom network approach in a large French population that feels concerned about their sleep. METHODS: Data were extracted from a questionnaire provided by the Réseau Morphée health network. A network analysis was conducted on 39 clinical variables related to sleep disorders and sleep health. After network estimation, statistical analyses consisted of calculating inferences of centrality, robustness (ie, testifying to a sufficient effect size), predictability, and network comparison. Sleep clinical variable centralities within the networks were analyzed by both sex and age using 4 age groups (18-30, 31-45, 46-55, and >55 years), and local symptom-by-symptom correlations determined. RESULTS: Data of 35,808 participants were obtained. The mean age was 42.7 (SD 15.7) years, and 24,964 (69.7%) were women. Overall, there were no significant differences in the structure of the symptom networks between sexes or age groups. The most central symptoms across all groups were nonrestorative sleep and excessive daytime sleepiness. In the youngest group, additional central symptoms were chronic circadian misalignment and chronic sleep deprivation (related to sleep behaviors), particularly among women. In the oldest group, leg sensory discomfort and breath abnormality complaint were among the top 4 central symptoms. Symptoms of sleep disorders thus became more central with age than sleep behaviors. The high predictability of central nodes in one of the networks underlined its importance in influencing other nodes. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of structural difference between networks is an important finding, given the known differences in sleep between sexes and across age groups. These similarities suggest comparable interactions between clinical sleep variables across sexes and age groups and highlight the implication of common sleep and wake neural circuits and circadian rhythms in understanding sleep health. More precisely, nonrestorative sleep and excessive daytime sleepiness are central symptoms in all groups. The behavioral component is particularly central in young people and women. Sleep-related respiratory and motor symptoms are prominent in older people. These results underscore the importance of comprehensive sleep promotion and screening strategies tailored to sex and age to impact sleep health.

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)0.004
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and SurveillanceSame topicMental Health Research TopicsFrench-language works237,207