4.7 Article

Using a Single Daytime Performance Test to Identify Most Individuals at High-Risk for Performance Impairment during Extended Wake

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-52930-y

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NASA [NNX14AK53G, NCC9-119]
  2. National Space Biomedical Research Institute [HPF01301]
  3. National Institute of Mental Health [R01MH45130]
  4. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [R01NS36590]
  5. Brigham and Women's Hospital General Clinical Research Center grant [M01RR02635]
  6. National Center for Research Resources [UL1RR025758]
  7. [5R01HL111759]
  8. NASA [NNX14AK53G, 678576] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We explored the predictive value of a neurobehavioral performance assessment under rested baseline conditions (evaluated at 8 hours awake following 8 hours of sleep) on neurobehavioral response to moderate sleep loss (evaluated at 20 hours awake two days later) in 151 healthy young participants (18-30 years). We defined each participant's response-to-sleep-loss phenotype based on the number of attentional failures on a 10-min visual psychomotor vigilance task taken at 20 hours awake (resilient: less than 6 attentional failures, n = 26 participants; non-resilient: 6 or more attentional failures, n = 125 participants). We observed that 97% of rested participants with 2 or more attentional failures (n = 73 of 151) and 100% of rested participants with 3 or more attentional failures (n = 57 of 151) were non-resilient after moderate sleep loss. Our approach can accurately identify a significant proportion of individuals who are at high risk for neurobehavioral performance impairment from staying up late with a single neurobehavioral performance assessment conducted during rested conditions. Additional methods are needed to predict the future performance of individuals who are not identified as high risk during baseline.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available