The negative impact on sleep for caregivers of children with intestinal failure on long-term parenteral nutrition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Survival rates for children with intestinal failure (IF) have improved with care provided in the home by family caregivers. Our objective was to compare total nocturnal sleep time (TST-N) in caregivers of children with IF on home PN to caregivers of children with a chronic medical condition. Methods: A comparative cross-sectional study of sleep was completed. All participants completed actigraphy and subjective measures of sleep (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index [PSQI], Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)). Univariate analysis was completed with an alpha value of < 0.05 considered significant. Results: Thirty-eight caregivers of children with IF and 29 caregivers of children without a chronic medical condition participated. Caregivers of children with IF achieved less sleep than caregivers of children without a chronic medical condition (7.0 vs 7.7 h, p < 0.01) resulting in 45 min less sleep per night. Caregivers of children with IF also demonstrated a shorter period of uninterrupted sleep (2.9 vs 4.2 h, p < 0.01), increased wake after sleep onset (49 vs 29 min, p < 0.01), increased night awakenings (8.9 vs 6.0, p < 0.01) and increased PSQI scores (7.7 vs 4.3, p < 0.01) compared to caregivers of healthy children. Conclusion: Caregivers of children with IF demonstrated decreased nighttime sleep amounts and sleep quality compared to caregivers of children without a chronic medical condition. This sleep debt may have significant consequences for the long-term health and wellbeing of caregivers and highlights the importance of further research to determine what supports are required to decrease the long-term impact for IF caregivers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".