Overview
This series tests whether repeated medical judgments alter later decisions, separating fatigue as an experience from time-of-day patterns and causal effects. It explains the proposed information-processing mechanism, examines confounding in later-day data, weighs a heterogeneous 2025 review, and assesses a preregistered Swedish triage field test. The evidence supports better, conditional research—not a universal fatigue effect.
Learning outcomes
- Time-of-day or call-order differences show when decisions vary, not that fatigue caused the change.
- Decision fatigue predicts less information processing, greater reliance on personal defaults, or higher urgency under specified conditions.
- A 2025 review reported significant effects in 45% of quantitatively assessed cases, across heterogeneous decisions and designs.
- A preregistered Swedish telephone-triage test found no predicted shift toward personal defaults or higher urgency at the tested comparison points.
Keywords
Preview every chapter · Unlock full text, audio, and video from chapter 4
PlansFAQ
Does a later-day pattern prove decision fatigue in healthcare?
No. Time of day and call order also track patient mix, service hours, staffing, and routines, so they show an association rather than its cause.
What does decision fatigue predict in repeated medical judgment?
It predicts that higher cumulative effort may raise the cost of further information processing, increasing reliance on personal defaults or simpler, more urgent choices.
What did the 2025 healthcare systematic review find about decision fatigue?
It reported significant effects in 45% of cases that quantitatively assessed the hypothesis, but the studies used inconsistent definitions, designs, and outcomes.
What did the Swedish telephone-triage field test show?
It found no predicted increase in personal-default choices or urgency in the preregistered overlap and break comparisons, with strong relative evidence for the point null at the tested conditions.