Maternal-reported shorter total sleep duration but not consecutive sleep duration in infancy is associated with future sleep problems in preschoolers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Poor sleep during childhood can affect multiple domains of functioning. However, the association between early infant sleep patterns and future sleep problems is not well-understood. This study aimed to assess whether maternal-reported total sleep duration (over 24 hours) and consecutive sleep duration in infancy are associated with later maternal reports of sleep problems in preschoolers. METHODS: This longitudinal study included a community sample of 294 mother-child dyads. Total sleep duration and consecutive sleep duration were measured by maternal reports using the Questionnaire about Sleep Habits at 6 months. Sleep problems were assessed by maternal reports using the Sleep Problems subscale of the Child Behaviour Checklist/1.5-5 at 48 and 60 months. RESULTS: Generalized Estimating Equations models revealed that maternal-reported infant shorter total sleep duration, but not consecutive sleep duration, was associated with more sleep problems in preschoolers (higher total Child Behaviour Checklist Sleep Problems subscale scores), adjusting for socioeconomic status, maternal depression, breastfeeding status, sleeping arrangements, time, and biological sex. More specifically, infant shorter total sleep duration was associated with more bedtime resistance, difficulty falling asleep, the presence of nightmares, and shorter sleep duration. CONCLUSIONS: Shorter maternal-reported total sleep duration but not consecutive sleep duration at 6 months was a marker of future parental reports of sleep problems in preschoolers. The results suggest that total sleep duration over 24 hours and sufficient opportunity to sleep should be prioritized over striving for an infant to sleep through the night during early infancy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".