MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404852818 · doi:10.6000/1929-6029.2024.13.28

The Association between Sweet Sugar Beverage Intakes and the Quality of Sleep in Working Age Adults

2024· article· en· W4404852818 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chalermpon Innachit, Mart Maiprasert, Veerapun Suvannamai, Peerapong Jiamjirachart, Nittoku Lungkorn

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSugarAssociation (psychology)Sleep qualityFood scienceQuality (philosophy)Environmental healthMedicinePsychologyBiologyInsomniaPsychiatryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: This cross-sectional study investigates the relationship between daily sugar intake from sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) and sleep quality in working adults aged 18–45 years who do not have chronic illnesses or diagnosed sleep disorders. The primary objective is to determine whether high sugar consumption increases the risk of poor sleep when other risk factors are considered simultaneously. This study is significant as it adds to the growing body of evidence regarding the impact of dietary factors on sleep quality, highlighting the potential health implications of sugar consumption. Methods: Participants were selected using consecutive sampling, and the study was conducted at Jomtien Hospital in Chonburi Province, Thailand. Data collection involved three key components: general demographic and health information records, a validated Thai questionnaire assessing sweetened beverage consumption, and the Thai version of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Sugar intake from SSBs was categorized into two groups: high (≥ 50 grams/day) and low (< 50 grams/day). Sleep quality was classified as poor (PSQI > 5) or good (PSQI ≤ 5). The relationship between sugar intake and sleep quality was analyzed using logistic regression, and the results were presented as odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: The study included 300 participants, 68% of whom were women, with an average age of 30 ± 7.6 years. A total of 58% of participants were found to have poor sleep quality. Those with poor sleep quality consumed an average of 131.9 ± 102.9 grams of sugar per day, compared to 99.8 ± 86.3 grams for those with good sleep quality, a difference that was statistically significant (p = 0.005). When sugar consumption was categorized, 79.3% of individuals in the high sugar consumption group (≥ 50 grams/day) had poor sleep quality, compared to 65.1% with good sleep quality in the same group. In contrast, 20.7% of individuals in the low sugar consumption group (< 50 grams/day) had poor sleep quality, compared to 34.9% with good sleep quality, also showing a statistically significant difference (p = 0.008). The crude odds ratio for high sugar consumption associated with poor sleep quality was 2.06 (95% CI: 1.22-3.45, p = 0.006). After adjusting for other variables, the odds ratio remained significant, with an adjusted OR of 2.02 (95% CI: 1.05-3.92, p = 0.036). Conclusion: The findings indicate that high sugar consumption from sugar-sweetened beverages is significantly associated with an increased risk of poor sleep quality (adjusted OR: 2.02, 95% CI: 1.05–3.92, p = 0.036). Based on these results, it is recommended that individuals experiencing sleep issues consider reducing their sugar intake. Future research should explore the mechanisms underlying this relationship and evaluate public health strategies aimed at reducing high sugar consumption.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.408 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Statistics in Medical ResearchSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207