MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399767731 · doi:10.54097/sn22q162

Research on the Relationship between Lifestyle and Sleep Health

2024· article· en· W4399767731 on OpenAlexaff
Xiangkun Ma, Z. Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueHighlights in Science Engineering and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSleep (system call)Sleep qualityInsomniaQuality (philosophy)Body mass indexPsychologyPittsburgh Sleep Quality IndexGerontologyClinical psychologyMedicineComputer sciencePsychiatryEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insomnia, a widespread concern among the populace, frequently prompts questions about the determinants of sleep quality. Addressing these queries, the study meticulously examines the impact of various lifestyle factors on sleep. This paper utilizes a comprehensive dataset from Kaggle, encompassing an array of lifestyle habits and their corresponding sleep quality metrics. Through the application of a linear regression model and the robust bootstrap method, the analysis has brought to light a substantial scientific link between lifestyle choices and the quality of sleep. The findings are revealing: key factors such as age, the extent of physical activity, and the number of steps taken daily exhibit a positive correlation with enhanced sleep quality. In stark contrast, this paper observes that elevated stress levels and increased systolic blood pressure negatively impinge upon sleep. Intriguingly, the study further reveals that sleep quality is not uniform across the board; it varies significantly with gender differences and Body Mass Index (BMI) levels. These insights underscore the multifaceted nature of sleep quality, influenced by a tapestry of lifestyle elements. The research contributes to a deeper understanding of sleep dynamics, offering valuable perspectives for improving sleep health in the society.

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)0.003
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHighlights in Science Engineering and TechnologySame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207