MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410501231 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsaf090.0208

0208 Are Canadian Varsity Athletes Sleeping Well? Insights on Adherence to Optimal Sleep Recommendations

2025· article· en· W4410501231 on OpenAlexaffabout
Félix-Gabriel Duval, Jean-François Caron, Geneviève Forest

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersNational Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
KeywordsAthletesSleep (system call)MedicinePhysical therapyPolysomnographyPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatryComputer scienceElectroencephalography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction In 2021, Walsh and colleagues highlighted the importance of sleep education for athletes and proposed a series of tips to educate athletes. These tips can be summarized as follow: (1) get more sleep than the standard recommendations; (2) nap to supplement insufficient nocturnal sleep; (3) maintain a good sleep hygiene; (4) having a training schedule in-line with their chronotype. The aim of this study was to explore the proportion of Canadian varsity students who follow these recommendations. Methods A total of 173 Canadian varsity athletes (M=20.8 ±2 years 66.5% females) completed an anonymous online survey of about 20 minutes during the academic year. The survey included questions about sleep habits, sleep hygiene, sleep environment, training schedule and lifestyle habits. Results Data showed that 65.8% of athletes do not get 8 hours of sleep during weekdays and 29% during weekends. Moreover, 31.5% of athletes do not even get 7 hours of sleep on average during weekdays and 11% during weekends. In addition, before a game, 58,4% rarely or do not nap, while 41,1% occasionally or always nap. On the other hand, during regular weekdays, 66.9% will nap at least once, while 33,1% never nap. Regarding training, 58.3% report training at a time that is not in-lined with their chronotypes. Data on sleep hygiene show that 65% of the athletes use their cellphone within one hour of going to bed, seven days a week, and 33.3% do not turn their notifications off during the night. Finally, 21.4% report that their sleep is disturbed by roommates, 41% report that ambient temperature is interfering with their sleep, 30.1% that ambient light affects their sleep, and 32.9% of them report environmental noise disturbing their sleep. Conclusion These results highlight that Canadian varsity athletes seem to be far from sleeping in line with the recommendations set by Walsh et al (2021). Most of Canadians varsity athletes do not get enough sleep. Our results also seem to indicate that Canadian varsity athletes may not be sleeping in an environment conducive to optimal sleep. Further studies are needed to investigate the factors that may prevent athletes from achieving optimal sleep. Support (if any)

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.006

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.360 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicHealth and Wellbeing ResearchFrench-language works237,207