Matthew Walker on health: what the evidence says · JRE #1109
“Residents that data in Juniata residents working a 13-hour shift off 460 percent more likely to make diagnostic errors in the Intensive Care Unit relative to when they working 16 hours.”
What the evidence says
Walker is referencing a real, widely cited study: Landrigan et al., published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2004, which compared medical interns working a traditional schedule of extended shifts (24 hours or more, roughly every third night) to interns on a schedule that eliminated extended shifts and capped weekly hours. The study's abstract reports interns made 5.6 times as many serious diagnostic errors in intensive care units under the traditional extended-shift schedule as under the shorter-shift intervention schedule (18.6 vs. 3.3 errors per 1,000 patient-days), a difference of 460 percent, matching the figure Walker cites. The transcript's specific shift lengths, roughly 13 versus 16 hours, do not match the study's actual comparison of 24-plus-hour extended shifts versus a reduced-hours schedule, and are likely a transcription error or a lapse in Walker's recollection of the exact shift lengths rather than an error in the 460 percent figure itself. The 2004 study remains a landmark piece of evidence behind subsequent U.S. resident duty-hour reforms and has not been retracted.