MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403150051 · doi:10.1210/jendso/bvae163.1561

8352 Association Between Sleep and Physical Activity Among Women with Obesity and Infertility

2024· article· en· W4403150051 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kathryne Brûlé, Farrah Jean-Denis, Matea Bélan, Marie‐France Langlois, Stéphanie-May Ruchat, Jean‐Patrice Baillargeon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Endocrine Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Lifestyle Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssociation (psychology)InfertilitySleep (system call)ObesityMedicinePhysical activityPsychologyGynecologyInternal medicinePhysical therapyPregnancyBiologyPsychotherapistComputer scienceGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Disclosure: K. Brûlé: None. F. Jean-Denis: None. M. Belan: None. M. Langlois: None. S. Ruchat: None. J. Baillargeon: Grant Recipient; Self; Ferring Pharmaceuticals. BACKGROUND: Infertility affects up to 15% of couples and a major modifiable risk factor is obesity. Thus, it has been recommended that women with obesity should be assisted to adopt healthy lifestyle behaviors prior to conception. Also, individuals with obesity often present reduced sleep quantity and quality, which could affect their physical activity (PA) practice. On the other hand, PA seems to improve sleep quality. Regular practice of PA could also improve an individual’s functional capacity, and thus could be an objective measure of a person's level of PA. Hence, our study aimed to: 1) compare the sleep quantity of women with obesity and infertility to the Canadian population; and 2) determine the relationship between their PA practice, functional capacity and sleep quantity and quality. Methods: This cross-sectional study is nested within a multicenter randomized controlled trial recruiting women of 18-40 years old with obesity and infertility in Canadian fertility clinics. At their initial research visit, they were assessed for body mass index (BMI), functional capacity (distance at 6-min walk test); total energy expenditure (EE, kcal/day), total PA (steps/day) and time spent in light (min/day) or moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA, min/day) or sedentarity (min/day) (Fitbit monitor); as well as sleep quality and duration (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index questionnaire and Fitbit monitor), and total time asleep per night (Fitbit monitor). For the Canadian population, we used the mean sleep duration of women aged 18-60 years reported in the Canadian Community Health Survey of 2020. Associations were tested using Pearson’s correlations (some measures were made normally distributed by square root transformation). Results: A total of 98 women (mean age = 31.5 years and mean BMI = 39.2 kg/m2) from 5 centers were included, 48% of whom were recruited in Sherbrooke (Qc). Their sleep duration was significantly lower than that of Canadian women (7.2±1.1 vs 8.1 h; p<0.001). Poor perceived sleep quality was negatively associated with EE (r=-0.271; p=0.020) and steps (r=-0.280; p=0.026), but directly with sedentary time (r=0.277; p=0.033). Light PA was negatively associated with measured sleep duration (r=-0.241; p=0.016), but positively associated with measured sleep efficiency (r=0.237; p=0.036). Functional capacity is positively associated with measures of EE, steps and MVPA (r=0.239 to 0.347; p=0.005 to 0.031), and there is a tendency with total time asleep (r=0.238, p=0.061). Conclusion: Canadian women with obesity and infertility have, on average, less sleep time than women in the general Canadian population. Their PA practice is associated with better perceived sleep quality but does not improve their sleep quantity per se. Furthermore, the association between their functional capacity and PA practice suggests that it is a valid objective indirect measure of PA practice. Presentation: 6/1/2024

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Endocrine SocietySame topicHealth and Lifestyle StudiesFrench-language works237,207