The association between sleep quality and anxiety among postsecondary students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Poor sleep quality has been associated with anxiety in postsecondary students. However, high-quality epidemiological evidence about this association is lacking. \nPurpose: To determine whether poor sleep quality is associated with anxiety in undergraduate university students. \nMethods: Two studies were conducted. First, a systematic review of the literature was conducted on the association between poor sleep quality and anxiety. Second, the association between poor sleep quality and moderate to extremely severe anxiety was measured in a cross-sectional study in postsecondary students enrolled in two faculties at Ontario Tech University (formerly known as he University of Ontario Institute of Technology) and the Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College during the 2017 fall academic term. \nResults: After screening and critically appraising all relevant articles, 27 of 28 studies reported a significant association between sleep quality and anxiety. Results from the cross-sectional study show that students who reported poor sleep quality were more likely to report moderate to extremely severe anxiety. \nConclusions: Both studies suggest that poor sleep quality is associated with anxiety in postsecondary students. To determine if poor sleep quality is an independent risk factor for anxiety in Canadian postsecondary students cohort studies are needed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".