1087 Comparison of Objective and Subjective Measures in Assessing Sleep Patterns of Premature Infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Premature infants exhibit unique sleep patterns, making the assessment of their sleep particularly challenging. Actigraphy and the Brief Infant Sleep Questionnaire (BISQ) are commonly used tools to evaluate infant sleep, yet comparisons between these methods remain limited in this population. The objective of this study is to determine whether significant differences exist between sleep data obtained through actigraphy and BISQ reports in premature newborns. Methods This study included 34 premature newborns (≤32 weeks of gestation) who wore actigraphy devices for three consecutive weekdays, one month after discharge from the neonatal unit. Actigraphy variables were measured for a nighttime period from 7:00 PM to 7:00 AM, using the average of the three nights. Parents also completed multiple questionnaires, including the BISQ and sleep diaries to corroborate actigraphy data. Exploratory paired t-tests were conducted to examine differences in sleep duration, number of nocturnal awakenings, and wake after sleep onset (WASO) between actigraphy data and BISQ parental reports. Results Results showed significant differences for all variables. BISQ-reported sleep duration was significantly longer than actigraphy-measured sleep duration (excluding WASO), overestimating by 59.35 minutes (t(33) = 2.71, p =.01). When comparing BISQ sleep duration to actigraphy-measured total sleep time (including WASO), BISQ underestimated sleep duration by 122.06 minutes (t(33) = -6.48, p <.001). BISQ-reported number of awakenings was significantly lower compared to actigraphy, with a mean difference of 1.26 awakenings (t(33) = −3.85, p <.001). Similarly, BISQ-reported WASO was, on average, 71.40 minutes shorter than actigraphy-measured WASO (t(33) = −4.28, p <.001). Conclusion These discrepancies between BISQ parental reports and actigraphy measures could reflect the subjective nature of parental reports, which provide a generalized overview of sleep, compared to the objective data that measure sleep on few specific nights. Our results suggest that the BISQ and actigraphy may not capture the same aspects of infant sleep, emphasizing the importance of selecting the appropriate tool based on the research or clinical objective. This is particularly relevant for premature infants, whose sleep tends to be more fragmented, making precise measurements essential for understanding their unique sleep patterns. Support (if any) This study was funded by the SSHRC.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".