Joint effect of sleep duration and sleep quality on self-rated health among Canadian adults: estimating relative excess risk due to interaction from a nationwide survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Self-rated health (SRH) is a globally recognized measure of health status. Previous studies have established that inadequate sleep duration and trouble falling asleep combinedly has a greater negative impact on health than either factor alone. This study aims to investigate the excess relative risk due to the interaction between short sleep duration and trouble sleeping on SRH. Method: We used the 2017-18 Canadian Community Health Survey (CCHS) publicly used microdata file. SRH was measured on a 5-point Likert scale from poor to excellent and dichotomized into "Good or Better" and "Fair or Poor." Sleep duration was categorized into "Less than 7 h" and "More than 7 h," while trouble sleeping was categorized as "Yes" or "No." A joint variable derived from these created four groups: "no sleep issues," "fewer sleeping hours (<7 h) only," "trouble sleeping only," and "fewer hours & trouble sleeping." A weighted univariable and multivariable logistic regression with robust variance estimation was conducted to estimate relative risk due to interaction. Results: Among Canadian adults, 40.96% reported less than 7 h of sleep, and 48.38% reported trouble sleeping. Approximately 11% had Fair or Poor SRH. The odds ratio for Fair or Poor SRH was 1.34 (95% CI: 1.23-1.46) for short sleep duration, 2.38 (95% CI: 2.18-2.61) for troubled sleep, and 2.97 (95% CI, 2.66-3.33) for both conditions. The adjusted RERI was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.40-1.21). Implication: These results imply that shorter duration of sleep and troubled sleeping may increase the negative influence on self-rated health.
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 | 0.017 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".