Circadian Variation of the Effects of Immobility on Symptoms of Restless Legs Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: It is now well established that symptoms of restless legs syndrome (RLS) are worsened by immobility and that their severity fluctuates according to a circadian pattern with a maximum occurring in the late evening or during the night. However, no study has ever attempted to dissociate these two effects. The objective of this study was to evaluate the nycthemeral variations in the effects of duration of immobility on symptoms of RLS. DESIGN: A 28-hour modified constant routine protocol. SETTING: Sleep Disorders Center, Montreal Sacré-Coeur Hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Seven patients with primary RLS (3 men, 4 women; mean age: 43.9 years) and seven controls matched for age (42.4 years) and gender. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: A 40-minute Suggested Immobilization Test (SIT) was repeated every 2 hours during the 28-hour protocol in order to quantify both subjective leg discomfort and periodic leg movements (PLM). Regarding leg discomfort, a two-way ANOVA performed on patients' data revealed a significant interaction (p = 0.037) between Time within the SIT and Time of day. Simple effect analyses performed to decompose the interaction showed that the increase in leg discomfort with duration of immobility was found only on SIT 7, 8, 9, 10 and 12, which corresponds to the period between 21:20 and 08:00. In addition, in patients, a significant circadian variation (p < 0.01) was found for the 28-hour profiles of leg discomfort progression during the SIT. No interaction or Time within the SIT effect was found for controls. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that worsening of RLS symptoms by immobility is closely linked to their intrinsic circadian variation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".