This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Timothy H. Monk, PhD; Daniel J. Buysse, MD
University of Pittsburgh (Pa)

JAMA. 1989;261(6):860-861.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor. —

We are writing to express surprise at the conclusions that Deaconson et al¹ draw from their study entitled "Sleep Deprivation and Resident Performance."

There are a number of good reasons why the particular performance battery chosen by the authors might not be sensitive enough to detect sleep-deprivation effects. Most notable are the following: (1) The extremely brief duration of the component tests (eg, one minute for the Baddeley Grammatical Reasoning Test). The literature has shown longduration tests to be the ones sensitive to sleep-deprivation effects. (2) The time of day when tested (between 6 AM and 8 AM), which coincides with the "alerting" phase of the circadian system (biologic clock); more major effects might have appeared had testing been between 2 PM and 3 PM, which coincides with the "postlunch dip." (3) The probable (though unreported) morning intake of caffeine, which would certainly have improved . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?