The Role of Depression in Linking Sleep Quality and Life Quality in OSAHS Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: OSAHS patients' quality of life is significantly impacted by poor sleep. This study examines the mediating role of depression in the relationship between sleep quality and life quality among OSAHS patients. Patients and Methods: Convenience sampling was applied to gather participants at a Chongqing tertiary hospital. Participants filled out questionnaires measuring their quality of life, depression, and sleep quality. Sleep quality was gauged by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), depression was assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), and quality of life was assessed by the Quebec Sleep Questionnaire (QSQ). Mediation analysis was performed via SPSS PROCESS. Results: The study found that depressive symptoms (r=-0.705, p<0.01) and sleep quality (r=-0.578, p<0.01) were adversely associated with quality of life in OSAHS patients. Depressive symptoms were found to significantly mediate the relationship between sleep quality and quality of life in OSAHS patients (Bootstrap 95% CI -0.0992, -0.0483), with 49.55% of the effect size attributable to the pathway from sleep quality to depression to quality of life. Conclusion: Sleep quality and depressive symptoms are important indicators of quality of life in OSAHS patients. Depression serves as a partial mediator (In this study, the mediating factor refers to the element that controls the association between quality of life and sleep quality) in the relationship between sleep quality and quality of life. Interventions aimed at enhancing sleep quality and alleviating depressive symptoms may lead to an improved quality of life for OSAHS patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".