Effects of Sleep Disorders on Academic Achievement and Cognitive Functioning in Children and Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis of Polysomnographic Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An adequate amount of good sleep is important for optimal cognitive functioning and successful academic achievement. Children with sleep disorders often experience cognitive impairments, underscoring the need for thorough assessment and effective management. This meta-analysis examines the impact of sleep disorders on cognitive functioning outcomes in children and adolescents (3–18 years old). Across 50 studies, 3,001 children with sleep disorders or disorders associated with sleep troubles and 1,425 control participants, as confirmed by polysomnographic assessments, were included. Results indicated that children with sleep-related breathing disorders showed small to large deficits in cognitive areas such as general intelligence (p < .001), memory (all ps < .022), attention (all ps < .007), cognitive flexibility (p < .001), processing speed (all ps < .001), and language (all ps < .037). In contrast, children with insomnia showed no significant impairments compared with controls (all ps > .11), although data were limited. Those with central disorders of hypersomnolence had lower immediate and long-term memory (p = .023, p = .016) and sustained attention (p < .001). Children with neurological or neurodevelopmental-related sleep disorders showed deficits in verbal IQ (p = .038), memory (p < .001), inhibitory control (p = .016), cognitive flexibility (p < .001), processing speed (p = .016), and expressive language (p = .005). Further research is needed on these latter groups. Clinicians, school professionals, and parents need to understand how sleep disorders may detrimentally affect neuropsychological functioning to make recommendations for children with sleep disorders.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".