MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990566873

Does my child have a sleep problem? : examining parent’s perception of children’s sleep habits and the association between parental knowledge and sleep hygiene

2022· dissertation· en· W6990566873 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSkemman · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and related disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBedtimeSleep hygieneSleep (system call)Association (psychology)PerceptionHabitQuarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parents are responsible for promoting optimal sleep for their children by engaging in healthy sleep hygiene, which is one of the factors that contributes to good sleep quality and quantity (Meltzer & Mindell, 2004; Owens et al., 2011). A gap in parental knowledge of appropriate sleep hygiene is one of potential causes for poor sleep hygiene in children (Meltzer & Mindell, 2004). Parental knowledge of sleep and what sleep habits parents consider to be a problem can depend on cultural norms (Adair & Bauchner, 1993; Jenni et al., 2005; Meltzer & Mindell, 2004). The aim of this study was twofold. First, to examine children‘s sleep habits in Iceland and if parents consider sleep habits on the Children‘s Sleep Habit Questionnaire (CSHQ) to be a problem. Second, to examine parental knowledge on factors that can contribute to adequate sleep, or sleep problems, in children as well as the relationship between parental knowledge and a child‘s sleep hygiene. An online questionnaire including 49 questions was sent out to parents of 2 – 5 year old children in Iceland. A total of 1416 parents answered all questions in the questionnaire. There was a small but significant difference in parental knowledge and four activities in the child‘s bedtime routine (reading/telling a story, television viewing, taking a bath, and releasing energy). Furthermore, parents that reported that their child got sufficient sleep duration answered significantly more questions correctly regarding sleep knowledge. Less than a quarter of parents considered it a problem that their child was dependent on parental presence to fall asleep or fell asleep in parents'/sibling’s room even though it is considered a sleep problem according to CSHQ. This study highlights the importance of taking cultural values into account when examining sleep problems as well as the need for further research on parental knowledge of children‘s sleep and how parents in Iceland can be encouraged to implement healthy sleep hygiene. \nKeywords: Children‘s sleep habits, parental knowledge, cultural difference.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSkemmanSame topicSleep and related disordersFrench-language works237,207