MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410502275 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsaf090.1067

1067 Sleep Disparities in Canadian Children Under 18 Years: A Scoping Review

2025· review· en· W4410502275 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mya Dockrill, Youssouf Aidara, Penny Corkum, Guido Simonelli

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSleep (system call)MedicinePsychologyGerontologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Insufficient sleep is prevalent in children and has many adverse health outcomes. Children facing health inequities (e.g., from a low socioeconomic background, or a racial/ethnic minority) have more sleep difficulties and are less likely to receive treatment. There is a lack of research investigating pediatric sleep and health inequities, particularly in Canada. Thus, the objective was to summarize the extant literature in this area. Methods A list of health inequities was developed following the Canadian Institute of Health Research EDI dimensions and in consultation with the Canadian Sleep Research Consortium. Four key electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL) were searched. Studies were included if they were 1) in English or French, 2) original studies (e.g., empirical data collected), 3) conducted in Canada, 4) with children under 18 years, 5) population-based studies, and 6) reported on sleep outcomes and health inequities. Results Three reviewers screened 15,448 abstracts and titles resulting in 357 articles full-text articles. After screening, 25 studies were included in this review, focusing on sleep in the context of low socioeconomic status (18 studies), gender/sex (17 studies), family composition/caretaking (9 studies), housing/neighbourhood characteristics (8 studies), race/ethnicity (8 studies), immigrants/refugees (3 studies), and language (1 study). No studies were found in the following categories: religious affiliation, cultural diversity, and sexual/gender minorities. Of note, no distinction was made between sex and gender in the literature. Much of the research has been done with Caucasian, adolescents and school-aged children, in Quebec or Ontario. Generally, it appears that sleep health and disordered sleep are negatively affected by low socioeconomic status, poor housing/neighbourhood conditions, and in non-Caucasian children. The findings are varied in terms of sex differences with most studies suggesting no differences (76%) and some suggesting differences between boys and girls with 67% of the literature suggesting that boys sleep better. There is no clear link between sleep disturbances and family composition and caretaking. Conclusion This is the first review to investigate the impact of health inequities on sleep in Canadian children. Identifying and understanding this link will inform the modification and development of sleep interventions to better meet the needs of these diverse individuals. 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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.238
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0250.035
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207