>>284456Bro did you not sleep at all -_-
www.sciencedirect.com/topics/immunology-and-microbiology/sleep-quality
>Sleep quality: The term “sleep quality” is widely used by researchers, clinicians, and the public; however, the expression has lacked a definitional consensus until recently. The National Sleep Foundation (Ohayon et al., 2017) has recently defined several measures of sleep quality including (1) sleep efficiency (i.e., ratio of time spent sleeping to time spent trying to sleep), (2) sleep latency (length of time in minutes it takes to transition from wake to sleep), (3) sleep duration (total time spent sleeping), (4) awakenings (the number of times a person wakes after imitating sleep), (5) wake after sleep onset (the time spent awake after sleep has been initiated and before final awakening), and (6) sleep architecture (the basic structural organization of normal sleep). There are two structural types of sleep, non-rapid eye movement (NREM) sleep and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep. NREM sleep is divided into stages 1, 2, 3, and 4 (or 3 stages in some more recent classification systems), representing a continuum of relative depth.Happy now? Well it's relevant to what we've been talking about at least -_-
Now your claims about "quality of sleep" being a non-term are void. Your next move?
>look your premises are already wrong at first clauseThe funny thing is, "quality of sleep" being a non-term (it is a real term though) would not make that my claim wrong w
>like you still havent linked me a single article back, after so many postsThis isn't a sport "who links most articles" buddy. You put the claim forth -> you prove it if you want (this isn't a real discussion anyway). It just so happened that your articles support my claims, so I don't have to do anything.