Ad libitum Weekend Recovery Sleep Fails to Prevent Metabolic Dysregulation during a Repeating Pattern of Insufficient Sleep and Weekend Recovery Sleep
Christopher M. Depner · Edward L. Melanson · Robert H. Eckel · Janet K. Snell-Bergeon · Leigh Perreault · Bryan C. Bergman · Janine A. Higgins · Molly K. Guerin · Ellen R. Stothard · Sarah J. Morton · Kenneth P. Wright
Current Biology · 2019
What the research tells us
In this short laboratory protocol, two unrestricted weekend nights followed by renewed restriction did not prevent the observed metabolic dysregulation. Whole-body insulin sensitivity fell by approximately 13% and 27% from each group's own baseline in continuous restriction and weekend recovery respectively. Those within-group percentages do not establish a significant between-group difference.
Scope & interpretation
The sample and duration were limited, while sleep, intake, weight and circadian timing changed together. The weight-adjusted weekend-recovery analysis had P=.054. Differences between adjusted and unadjusted results matter; the experiment does not establish that every form of catch-up sleep is without value.
Study at a glance
- POPULATION & SAMPLE
- 36 young, normal-weight healthy adults, 18 women and 18 men: eight controls, 14 continuous-restriction and 14 weekend-recovery participants.
- EXPOSURE / INTERVENTION / SUBJECT
- Nine-hour nightly sleep opportunity for controls, five hours for continuous restriction, or restriction followed by two unrestricted nights and renewed restriction.
- OUTCOMES
- Clamp-measured insulin sensitivity, energy intake, weight and circadian measures.
- TIME FRAME
- A controlled restriction–weekend recovery–restriction cycle, without long-term free-living follow-up.
Cited on this site
Editorial & review record
Record for v0.3 · Updated
Editorial responsibility: TAP Editorial Team
Editorial note
Under the editorial responsibility of the TAP Editorial Team, this publication used AI assistance for content organization and editing.
Download detailed editorial record (JSON) ↓
How responsibilities and review are recorded ↗Scope of this reading note
Full-text results, STAR Methods randomization/clamp measurements, discussion and limitations. All between-group and adjusted models have not been independently reproduced.
- Study funding
- NIH HL109706, DK111161, TR001082, DK048520 and Sleep Research Society Foundation 011-JP-16.
- Competing interests
- K. P. Wright disclosed NIH advisory-board membership/personal fees, Torvec scientific advice/personal fees, fees from Circadian Therapeutics and Kellogg, and outside-study support from NIH, the Office of Naval Research, PAC-12 and Somalogic. Other authors reported nothing to disclose.
Project support
Founded and supported by Resilio.
Revision history
- · v0.3
Added group sizes and within-group percentages, clarifying between-group inference and weight adjustment.