Resident Sleep Associated With Overnight Duty Periods of 12-, 16-, and 24-Hour Durations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Acute and chronic sleep deprivation are associated with fatigue and reduced performance and have provided rationale to modify resident schedules. We evaluated sleep in trainees working in 3 Canadian intensive care units (ICUs) during trials of 3 resident overnight schedules—conventional 24-hour, 16-hour, and sequential 12-hour overnight duty.Methods: Consenting ICU residents wore wrist Actigraphs. Data were reviewed for completeness and sleep was estimated. Days were classified as on-call, postcall, weekday, or weekend (no duty). Sleep duration (minutes), presented as median (interquartile range [IQR]), was compared using analysis of variance.Results: The 25 trainees had a median (IQR) of 6 (5–8) complete 24-hour periods of Actigraph data (total 185). Sleep in the 24 hours preceding the end of duty was greatest in sequential 12-hour night schedule (409 [358–447]) versus 16-hour night (145 [112–239]) and conventional 24-hour (118 [38–215]) schedules (P = .001). Sleep from 8 pm to 8 am was similar: 12-hour night 126 (62–174), 16-hour night 85 (40–100), and conventional 24 hours 84 (17–185, P = .50). Midway through the 3- or 4-day sequence of 12-hour nights trainees were sleeping for 410 (359–447) minutes per day. Sleep duration was 664 (542–853) minutes postcall, 450 (400–521) minutes on weekdays, and 485 (391–548) minutes on weekends free of duty.Conclusions: Canadian trainees in ICU are acutely but not chronically sleep deprived, and routinely obtain a median of 1 to 2 hours of sleep when working overnight. However, over the 24 hours ending at morning handover, trainees working sequential nights obtained the most sleep. The median duration of postcall recovery sleep (11 hours) and routine sleep (> 7 hours) suggests that Canadian ICU trainees are not chronically sleep deprived.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".