Skip to main content
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2025 Oct 7;68(12):1088–1104. doi: 10.1002/ajim.70027

Prevalence of Overnight Work (1 a.m. to 5 a.m.) Among United States Workers

Imelda S Wong 1,2,, Toni Alterman 3, Beverly M Hittle 4, Raquel Velazquez‐Kronen 3, I‐Chen Chen 5
PMCID: PMC12606400  PMID: 41054842

ABSTRACT

Background

Many factors have resulted in the normalization of nonstandard work schedules in recent decades, including globalization requiring working across time zones and growing demands for goods and services. This paper provides national estimates of overnight work in the USA.

Methods

We used cross‐sectional data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (n = 19,386 US employed adults ≥ 18 years). This survey contained a unique definition of overnight work (i.e., between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.), based on the window of circadian low. Weighted prevalence rates were provided across categories of sociodemographic characteristics, health status, health behaviors, and occupational factors.

Results

We estimated more than 21 million US employed adults experienced overnight work (14.2%). Higher prevalence was found among men (17.8%), non‐Hispanic Black adults (17.2%), non‐US born adults (11.2%), those with some college (15.9%) or a high school (16.7%) education, or living in the Midwest region (15.8%). Compared to those sleeping 7–9 h (10.5%), higher percentages of adults working overnight slept < 7 h (21.4%) and > 9 h (17.0%). Increasing prevalence was observed with increasing weekly work hours (p < 0.0001). Higher prevalence was reported among multiple job holders (19.5%). Industries and occupations with the greatest percentage of overnight workers were Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities (29.3%), and Protective Services (47.4%).

Conclusion

Our estimates of overnight work in 2015 are almost five times higher than estimates from 2004. Given that overnight work has been associated with adverse safety and health outcomes, additional policies and programs are needed to protect this growing population of workers.

Keywords: industry, National Health Interview Survey, night shift, nonstandard work schedule, occupation, overnight work, prevalence, shift work, US workers, work hours

1. Introduction

Work scheduled outside of regular daytime hours, such as overnight shifts, is associated with a wide range of negative health and safety outcomes [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. It is hypothesized that working during normal sleeping hours and sleeping during normal waking hours can lead to desynchronization of circadian rhythms [1, 6, 7]. Circadian rhythms act as internal clocks in our bodies which drive virtually all physiologic and behavioral processes [6, 8]. Disruption of regular circadian functioning may be the primary biological pathway linking overnight shifts with adverse outcomes [8]. In the short term, this could lead to impaired sleep and cognition with further increased risks for work injury [9, 10, 11]. Prolonged exposure to overnight work has been associated with increased risk of chronic health conditions, such as cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancer [1, 4, 5, 6, 12, 13].

In addition to circadian disruption, other mechanisms or pathways may link shift work with increased risks among overnight shift workers. For example, nonstandard schedules, such as night shifts, have been described as “asynchronous with the majority of society” and may lead to feelings of time scarcity and social and psychological distress [14]. Night shift workers may have difficulty finding time to attend social events in the evening and may forego sleep to manage family responsibilities, school, or other employment during the day [15, 16]. Schedules involving “chronobiological and social disruption (e.g., night shifts),” are also linked to unhealthy behaviors, such as frequent smoking, heavy alcohol consumption and sedentary behaviors [14, 17].

The prevalence of overnight work in the USA has been explored in prior studies using the Current Population Surveys (CPS) [18, 19, 20, 21]. Presser employed the 1991 and 1997 CPS questions regarding start and end times of the respondent's main job in the week prior, to define “fixed night” shifts as “at least half the hours worked most days last week falling between midnight and 8 a.m.” [18, 19, 22, 23]. Beers and McNenamin used the 1997 and 2004 CPS data, respectively, in which respondents were asked to self‐select the type of work schedule which best described their work at their main job [20, 21, 23, 24]. “Regular night shift” in the CPS was defined as “anytime around 9 p.m. to 8 a.m.” However, over the past few decades, nonstandard work schedules have become more common, due in part from globalization requiring working across time zones, advances in information communications technologies, and growing demands for goods and services [14, 25, 26]. As such, it is unclear if prior prevalence estimates reflect the current US workforce.

As demonstrated by existing literature, definitions of shift work in previous epidemiologic studies have varied widely, leading to calls for more precise measures to improve exposure assessment and risk estimates [27]. Prior studies have used broad categories of shift work (e.g., day, evening, night, rotating), which may result in exposure misclassification [27, 28]. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has recommended several “domains” to improve exposure assessment of night shifts, including the identification of work between midnight and 5 a.m., which has the most substantial effects on “circadian phase shifts and sleep perturbation” [29]. Similarly, the “window of circadian low” has been defined as the hours between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m., and represents the period of clock time where individuals exhibit peak fatigue and greatest performance decrements [30, 31, 32].

This paper builds upon prior surveillance studies of overnight work to provide updated national prevalence estimates for the USA. Our objective was to describe the prevalence of overnight work across sociodemographic characteristics, health status, health behaviors, and occupational factors.

2. Methods

2.1. Data Source

We used publicly available data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), a nationally representative cross‐sectional survey of health among noninstitutionalized civilians residing in the United States [33, 34]. While the 2015 survey may not reflect the most current workforce characteristics (e.g., rise in overnight work with the increased globalization of work and the gig economy) [35, 36], it includes a NIOSH‐sponsored occupational health supplement with a precise definition of overnight work, based on clock‐time and circadian influences, that has not been repeated in subsequent years. The most recent NHIS that included a question about work hours was in 2021, which asked about “usual hours of work.” However, respondents self‐selected into five broad shift work categories which did not include any clock‐time definitions (e.g., day shift, evening shift, night shift, rotating shift, some other shift).

The NHIS is an annual survey conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, using a multistage, clustered, and stratified area probability design that permits representative sampling of US households and other noninstitutional dwellings. Trained representatives from the US Census Bureau conducted in‐person computer‐assisted interviews (with some telephone follow‐up). Certain populations, such as Black, Hispanic, Asian populations, and those aged 65 or older, were oversampled. All respondents provided verbal consent prior to participating [33, 37]. The NHIS is approved by the Ethics Review Board of the National Center for Health Statistics and the U.S. Office of Management and Budget [33].

In 2015, the NHIS obtained data from 41,293 households representing 103,789 individuals [33]. The number of sample adults surveyed was 33,672, with a response rate of 55.2% [33]. We restricted our study population to respondents aged 18 years and older who were defined as “currently employed” in the NHIS. This includes those who, in the week prior to being interviewed, had worked either for pay at a job or business, with a job or business but not at work, or working without pay at a family‐owned job or business [33].

2.2. Study Definitions

2.2.1. Overnight Work

Currently employed adult participants were asked the following question pertaining to overnight work: “During the past 30 days, did you work any amount of time between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.?” This question was included in an occupational health supplement sponsored by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and was developed in consultation with sleep and shift work experts. This definition is similar to others, such as the “window of circadian low,” and follows recommendations from the IARC committee who first identified shift work as a probable human carcinogen [29, 30, 31, 32]. We further described the national prevalence of overnight work by sociodemographic characteristics, health status, health behaviors, and occupational factors. Definitions for variables used in this study and associated NHIS survey questions are included in Supplement S1A.

2.2.2. Sociodemographic Variables

Respondents' sociodemographic characteristics included self‐reported age, sex, race and ethnicity, region of residence, highest level of education attainment, marital status, and presence of minor children in the family. Race and ethnicity categories reflect the questions used in the 2015 survey and OMB 1997 standards for reporting. We categorized nativity as “US born” or “non‐US born.”

2.2.3. Health Status and Health Behaviors

Health status and health behaviors included self‐reported health, leisure‐time physical activity, sleep, smoking, and alcohol use. Self‐reported health was categorized as excellent/very good, good, and fair/poor. Psychometric studies recommend combining “excellent” and “very good” categories to achieve better linear fit with the general health evaluation concept, because the difference between these two categories is significantly smaller than between other categories [38, 39, 40]. Sleep was ascertained by the question “On average, how many hours of sleep do you get in a 24‐h period?”. We used “7–9 h” as the reference category, based on sleep duration recommendations for healthy adults to promote optimal health [41, 42].

The NHIS categorized leisure‐time physical activities as “vigorous” or “light or moderate” based on self‐reported usual weekly frequency and intensity. “Vigorous” activity was defined in the NHIS as activities lasting “at least 10 min that cause heavy sweating or large increases in breathing or heart rate.” “Light or moderate” activity was defined as those lasting “at least 10 min that cause only light sweating or a slight to moderate increase in breathing or heart rate” [33]. Smoking status was defined based on lifetime and current smoking behaviors. All adults were asked if they had smoked at least 100 cigarettes in their entire life. Those who said “yes” were asked a series of questions about the age at which they began smoking and their current smoking practices (every day, some days, not at all). The NHIS defines current smokers as those who have ever smoked 100 cigarettes and currently smoke every day or some days. Those who no longer smoked were categorized as former smokers [33]. We combined the five NHIS categories (“current every day,” “current some day,” “former,” “never,” “smoker, current unknown”) into three categories representing “never,” “former,” and “current” smoker. Assessment of participants' alcohol use was similarly ascertained from a series of questions about lifetime and current consumption and categorized as “infrequent,” “light,” “moderate,” and “heavy” [33, 34].

2.2.4. Occupational Characteristics

Additional occupational characteristics included self‐reported weekly work hours, usual work schedule, years on the job, work arrangement, employer type, multiple jobs, paid sick leave, industry, and occupation. Weekly hours worked were assessed with the question “How many hours did you work last week at all jobs or businesses?” Categories of work hours were centered around the 40‐h workweek limit identified by the Fair Labor Standards Act (§207(a)), after which overtime pay is required for certain categories of workers [43]. Weekly work hours beyond 60 h/week were also explored as “extreme work hours,” as described in a prior study [44].

Usual work schedule was ascertained by respondents' self‐selection into one of four work schedule categories—regular daytime schedule, regular evening shift, regular night shift, and rotating shift [34]. We included this variable to better understand the prevalence of overnight work among those who do not self‐identify as regular night shift workers. “Years on the job” referred to time respondents have been employed in their main job or business. Respondents' work arrangement was described as a “regular, permanent employee,” “independent contractor, freelancer or consultant,” “working for a contractor,” or “other.” Employer type was categorized as “private company,” “government,” “self‐employed,” or “working without pay at a family‐owned business.” Industry and occupation were described in the NHIS using categories based on 4‐digit Census codes consistent with the 2012 North American Industry Classification System and the 2010 Standard Occupational Classification [33]. We further grouped industry categories into sectors identified in the National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA), an extensive NIOSH partnership program that includes stakeholders from industry, labor, academia, the practitioner community, and other governmental agencies to develop innovative research and workplace interventions [45, 46, 47].

2.3. Analysis

All statistical analyses were performed using SAS 9.4 survey procedures (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). To account for the complex survey design of the NHIS and create a representative sample of US workers, responses were weighted using the NHIS sample adult record weight “to adjust for design, ratio, nonresponse, and poststratification” [33]. As per NCHS guidelines, estimates and proportions were not reported for categories with 30 or fewer unweighted responses [48]. Confidence intervals were calculated using the Korn–Graubard method to account for the complex survey design of the NHIS [33, 49]. Prevalence rates were calculated from weighted estimates and represent the proportion of respondents who reported working an overnight shift in the past 30 days out of the total population of workers in the category of interest. Prevalence ratios represent the ratio of the category of interest to the reference category. Confidence intervals that include “1” indicate that the prevalence between groups is not significantly different. Global test of proportions, using the Rao–Scott modified χ 2 test, was conducted to examine the association of each variable with overnight work. The complex survey sampling design of the NHIS can introduce correlation among sample units, therefore using traditional χ 2 tests would be inappropriate. The Rao–Scott modification accounts for the complex design, thus resulting in more accurate p values [50, 51]. We defined statistically significant associations as p < 0.05.

This activity was reviewed by CDC, deemed research not involving human subjects, and was conducted consistently with applicable federal law and CDC policy. 1

3. Results

From the 33,672 adults who were interviewed for the 2015 NHIS, 19,456 reported working at a job or business for pay, with a job or business but not at work, or working at a family business not for pay in the week prior to being interviewed. We excluded those in military‐specific occupations (N = 35) because the NHIS does not assign a weight to estimate the national military population [33]. We further excluded those who did not provide a response to the overnight work question (N = 35). Our final sample population of workers consisted of 19,386 respondents (Figure 1). Among those, 2779 reported working any time between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. in the 30 days prior to being interviewed. This represents over 21 million US adults and 14.2% of the total US worker population (Table 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Sample size establishment from respondents to the 2015 National Health Interview Survey for estimates of prevalence of working any time between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. in the past 30 days.

Table 1.

Sociodemographic characteristics for workers, 18 years and older, who reported working overnight (i.e., any amount of time between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.) in the past 30 days.

Unweighted sample population of respondents who worked overnight Estimated national population who worked overnight Weighted prevalenceb (95% CI) Prevalence ratio (95% CI) Modified Rao–Scott 2 (p)
Total 2779 21,137,000 14.2 (13.5–15.0)
Age (years) < 0.0001
18–24 289 2,773,000 14.9 (12.6–17.3) 0.97 (0.81–1.16)
25–34 720 5,029,000 15.6 (14.1–17.3) 1.02 (0.89–1.17)
35–44 630 4,912,000 15.3 (13.8–16.9) Reference
45–54 617 4,725,000 14.2 (12.8–15.6) 0.92 (0.81–1.05)
55–64 407 3,119,000 12.6 (11.0–14.2) 0.82 (0.70–0.96)
≥ 65 116 579,000 8.0 (6.2–10.1) 0.52 (0.40–0.67)
Sex
Male 1720 13,942,000 17.8 (16.6–19.0) 1.72 (1.56–1.90) < 0.0001
Female 1059 7,194,000 10.3 (9.5–11.1) Reference
Education < 0.0001
Less than high school 215 1,612,000 13.1 (10.9–15.5) 1.13 (0.94–1.35)
High school/GED 684 5,417,000 16.7 (15.0–18.4) 1.43 (1.27–1.62)
Some college or associate degree 1004 7,556,000 15.9 (14.6–17.3) 1.37 (1.21–1.55)
University degree 871 6,447,000 11.6 (10.6–12.7) Reference
Race and ethnicity < 0.0001
Non‐Hispanic White 1786 14,015,000 14.5 (13.6–15.5) Reference
Non‐Hispanic Black 419 2,988,000 17.2 (15.1–19.4) 1.19 (1.04–1.36)
Hispanic 392 2,793,000 11.6 (10.1–13.1) 0.80 (0.69–0.92)
Non‐Hispanic Asian 140 1,084,000 12.1 (9.9–14.5) 0.83 (0.69–1.00)
Non‐Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native a
Non‐Hispanic Other Race a
Nativity < 0.0001
US born 2356 18,011,000 15.0 (14.1–15.8) Reference
Non‐US born 423 3,125,000 11.2 (9.9–12.6) 0.75 (0.66–0.85)
Marital status 0.43
Married/living with partner 1442 13,339,000 14.0 (13.0–14.9) Reference
Widowed/divorced/separated 541 2,852,000 15.0 (13.5–16.6) 1.07 (0.96–1.20)
Never married 791 4,928,000 14.6 (13.3–16.1) 1.05 (0.94–1.17)
Minor children in the family 0.55
No 1738 12,277,000 14.1 (13.2–15.0) Reference
Yes 1041 8,860,000 14.5 (13.4–15.6) 1.03 (0.94–1.13)
Region of residence 0.12
Northeast 422 3,366,000 13.3 (11.8–14.9) Reference
Midwest 672 5,495,000 15.8 (14.1–17.7) 1.19 (1.01– 1.40)
South 900 7,396,000 13.8 (12.6–15.1) 1.04 (0.90–1.21)
West 785 4,879,000 14.0 (12.7–15.5) 1.06 (0.91–1.23)

Note: Bold = significant differences.

Abbreviation: CI = confidence interval.

a

Estimate not reported as per NCHS guidelines for < 30 responses in the sample population.

b

Weighted prevalence = estimated population for category of interest/total national population of workers for category of interest.

3.1. Sociodemographic Variables

Age, gender, education, race and ethnicity, and nativity were all significantly associated with overnight work (p < 0.0001, Table 1). A lower prevalence of overnight work was reported among workers aged 55–64 years (12.6%) and 65 years and over (8.0%), compared to those aged 35–44 years (15.3%). Significantly higher prevalence was found among men (17.8%) compared to women (10.3%). Workers with high school or equivalent education, or some college education, reported higher percentages of overnight work (16.7% and 15.9%, respectively) compared to those with university degrees (11.6%). Compared to non‐Hispanic White workers (14.5%), non‐Hispanic Black workers reported higher prevalence (17.2%), while lower rates were found among Hispanic workers (11.6%). Lower prevalence of overnight work also occurred among non‐US born workers (11.2%) compared to US born (15.0%). Higher prevalence was reported among workers living in the Midwest (15.8%) compared to the Northeast (13.3%). No significant differences were found for marital status, or presence of minor children in the family.

3.2. Health Status and Health Behaviors

Across health status and health behaviors, only sleep and smoking status were significantly associated with overnight work (both p < 0.0001, Table 2). Compared to workers who slept 7–9 h over the past 24 h (10.5%), significantly higher prevalence of overnight work occurred among those who slept < 7 h (21.4%) and more than 9 h (17.0%). Prevalence of current and former smoking was higher (19.3% and 15.7%, respectively) compared to never having smoked (12.7%). We also found that overnight workers reported a higher prevalence of fair or poor health (16.7%), compared to excellent or very good health. No significant differences in prevalence were found across categories of leisure‐time physical activity or current alcohol use.

Table 2.

Health status and behaviors for workers, 18 years and older, who reported working overnight (i.e., any amount of time between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.) in the past 30 days.

Unweighted sample population of respondents who worked overnight Estimated national population who worked overnight Weighted prevalencea (95% CI) Prevalence ratio (95% CI) Modified Rao–Scott 2 (p)
Total 2779 21,137,000 14.2 (13.5–15.0)
Self‐reported health 0.11
Excellent/Very good 1865 14,298,000 13.9 (13.0–14.7) Reference
Good 706 5,423,000 14.8 (13.4–16.3) 0.96 (0.78–1.18)
Fair/poor 181 1,411,000 16.7 (13.9–19.8) 1.21 (1.01–1.43)
Sleep < 0.0001
< 7 h 1365 10,363,000 21.4 (19.8–23.0) 2.04 (1.83–2.28)
7–9 h 1271 9,646,000 10.5 (9.6–11.3) Reference
> 9 h 49 426,000 17.0 (11.6–23.7) 1.62 (1.14–2.31)
Leisure time physical activity 0.12
None 683 5,206,000 13.9 (12.5–15.3) Reference
Light/moderate 511 3,816,000 13.1 (11.6–14.6) 0.94 (0.81–1.09)
Vigorous 1553 11,882,000 14.8 (13.8–15.8) 1.07 (0.95–1.20)
Smoker < 0.0001
Never 1656 12,455,000 12.7 (11.9–13.5) Reference
Former 567 4,406,000 15.7 (14.2–17.3) 1.24 (1.11–1.39)
Current 549 4,196,585 19.3 (17.2–21.5) 1.52 (1.34–1.72)
Current alcohol use 0.74
Infrequent 355 2,646,328 14.0 (12.2–15.9) Reference
Light 1001 7,921,095 14.7 (13.6–15.9) 1.05 (0.91–1.23)
Moderate 548 4,190,738 15.3 (13.7–16.9) 1.09 (0.92–1.29)
Heavy 162 1,128,086 14.3 (11.7–17.3) 1.03 (0.82–1.28)

Note: Bold = significant differences.

Abbreviation: CI = confidence interval.

a

Weighted prevalence = estimated population for category of interest/total national population of workers for category of interest.

3.3. Occupational Characteristics

Not surprisingly, usual work schedule was associated with overnight work (p < 0.0001, Table 3). The highest prevalence of overnight work was reported by those who usually worked nights (77.6%), followed by rotating shift workers (30.4%) and evening shift workers (20.5%). However, almost 7% of regular daytime workers also worked sometime between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. Working overnight was also associated with weekly hours worked (p < 0.0001, Table 3), with increased prevalence occurring with increasing hours of work. Lowest prevalence of overnight work was found among those working < 20 h/week (8.2%), with increasing percentages for 21–40 h/week (11.3%), 41–60 h/week (20.7%), and > 60 h/week (35.8%). Having more than one job was associated with overnight work (p < 0.0001), with higher prevalence among workers with multiple jobs, compared to those with one job (19.5% vs. 13.8%). Prevalence of overnight work was lower among government workers compared to those employed in private companies (12.2% vs. 14.6%). There were no significant findings for years on the job, work arrangement, or paid sick leave.

Table 3.

Occupational characteristics for workers 18 years and older, who reported working overnight (i.e., any amount of time between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.) in the past 30 days.

Unweighted sample population of respondents who worked overnight Estimated national population who worked overnight Weighted prevalenceb (95% CI) Prevalence ratio (95% CI) Modified Rao–Scott 2 (p)
Total 2779 21,137,000 14.2 (13.5–15.0)
Weekly hours worked < 0.0001
≤ 20 180 1,404,000 8.2 (6.9–9.8) 0.73 (0.61–0.88)
21–40 1283 9,903,000 11.3 (10.4–12.1) Reference
41–60 1011 7,799,000 20.7 (19.0–22.4) 1.83 (1.65–2.04)
> 60 305 2,031,000 35.8 (31.3–40.4) 3.18 (2.74–3.68)
Usual work schedule < 0.0001
Daytime 942 7,249,000 6.7 (6.1–7.3) Reference
Evening 193 1,580,000 20.5 (16.7–24.8) 3.09 (2.49–3.82)
Night 557 4,406,000 77.6 (72.8–82.0) 11.67 (10.54–12.92)
Rotating 1083 7,877,000 30.4 (28.2–32.6) 4.56 (4.08–5.10)
Years on the job 0.34
0–5 1535 11,552,000 14.3 (13.3–15.3) Reference
6–10 488 3,677,000 13.9 (12.4–15.6) 0.98 (0.85–1.11)
11–20 484 3,909,000 15.4 (13.8–17.2) 1.08 (0.95–1.23)
20+ 267 1,965,000 13.1 (11.1–15.2) 0.91 (0.77–1.08)
Work arrangement 0.67
Regular, permanent employee 2285 17,428,000 14.2 (13.4–15.0) Reference
Independent contractor, freelance, or consultant 301 2,201,000 15.0 (12.9–17.3) 1.05 (0.91–1.23)
Working for a contractor 80 648,000 15.6 (11.5–20.4) 1.10 (0.83–1.45)
Other 112 855,000 12.8 (9.9–16.3) 0.90 (0.70–1.16)
Employer type 0.03
Private company 2141 16,373,000 14.6 (13.7–15.5) Reference
Government (federal, state, or local) 364 2,692,000 12.2 (10.6–14.0) 0.84 (0.71–0.98)
Self‐employed 255 1,982,000 15.2 (13.1–17.6) 1.04 (0.89–1.22)
Family‐owned business without pay a
More than one job < 0.0001
No 2447 18,724,000 13.8 (13.0–14.6) Reference
Yes 332 2,413,000 19.5 (16.9–22.4) 1.42 (1.22–1.65)
Paid sick leave 0.74
No 1180 8,955,000 14.1 (13.1–15.3) 0.98 (0.89–1.08)
Yes 1579 12,041,000 14.4 (13.4–15.4) Reference

Note: Bold = significant differences.

Abbreviation: CI = confidence interval.

a

Estimate not reported as per NCHS guidelines for < 30 responses in the sample population.

b

Weighted prevalence = estimated population for category of interest/total national population of workers for category of interest.

3.4. Industry and Occupation

The industries with the highest prevalence of overnight work were Transportation, Warehousing, and Utilities sector (29.3%), followed by Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing (21.7%), Public Safety (19.9%), Manufacturing (19.3%), and Healthcare and Social Assistance (18.5%) (Table 4). The lowest prevalence of overnight work was reported in the Construction sector (8.4%), followed by Services (11.0%), and in some Service subsectors: Finance and Insurance (5.6%), Real Estate (6.3%), Education (4.9%), and Other Services (7.6%). These included Repair and maintenance, Personal services (e.g., barber shops, laundry, funeral homes), and Religious, grantmaking, civic, and labor services. However, other Service subsectors, such as Accommodation and Food (18.2%), reported a higher rate of overnight work compared to all US workers.

Table 4.

Prevalence of overnight work (i.e., any amount of time between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.) in the United States, among workers 18 years and older, in the past 30 days, by Industry and National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) Sectors, 2015.

Industry sector Unweighted sample population of respondents who worked overnight Estimated national population who worked overnight Weighted Prevalenceb (95% CI) Prevalence Ratioc (95% CI)
Total 2779 21,137,000 14.2 (13.5–15.0)
Agriculture, Forestry, and Fishing 66 416,000 21.7 (16.9–27.3) 1.54 (1.13–2.09)
Construction 102 760,000 8.4 (6.6–10.5) 0.58 (0.45–0.74)
Healthcare and Social Assistance 499 3,586,000 18.5 (16.7–20.4) 1.36 (1.22–1.51)
Manufacturing 350 2,981,000 19.3 (17.1–21.6) 1.41 (1.24–1.61)
Mining 50 144,000 17.2 (11.4–24.4) 1.21 (0.80– 1.81)
Public Safety 186 1,449,000 19.9 (17.4–22.6) 1.43 (1.20–1.70)
Services 932 7,273,000 11.0 (10.1–11.9) 0.65 (0.59–0.71)
Information 67 567,000 17.2 (13.7–21.2) 1.21 (0.91–1.62)
Finance and Insurance 48 398,000 5.6 (4.1–7.4) 0.38 (0.26–0.54)
Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 33 194,000 6.3 (4.1–9.1) 0.44 (0.29–0.65)
Professional, Scientific and Technical 183 1,488,000 13.1 (10.9–15.5) 0.91 (0.76–1.10)
Management of Companies and Enterprises a
Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation 140 1,074,000 15.9 (13.1–19.0) 1.12 (0.90–1.39)
Education 100 676,000 4.9 (3.8–6.1) 0.32 (0.25–0.41)
Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 59 425,000 15.3 (11.8–19.4) 1.08 (0.78–1.48)
Accommodation and Food 222 1,873,000 18.2 (15.7–20.9) 1.31 (1.10–1.55)
Other services 80 577,000 7.6 (5.7–10.0) 0.52 (0.38–0.72)
Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities 266 1,937,000 29.3 (25.9–32.9) 2.16 (1.88–2.49)
Utilities 45 267,000 24.6 (18.2–32.0) 1.74 (1.17–2.58)
Transportation and Warehousing 221 1,670,000 30.2 (26.7–33.9) 2.22 (1.90–2.58)
Wholesale and Retail Trade 301 2,400,000 12.4 (10.6–14.4) 0.86 (0.73–1.01)
Wholesale Trade 54 508,000 12.5 (8.9–16.9) 0.87 (0.61–1.25)
Retail Trade 247 1,892,000 12.4 (10.6–14.4) 0.86 (0.73–1.01)

Note: Main headings reflect National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) sector categories (https://www.cdc.gov/nora/default.html). Subheadings represent industries within each NORA sector. Results for the Oil and Gas Extraction sector have not been reported because the microdata is not available in the public use data set.

b

No responses reported.

c

Weighted prevalence = estimated population for category of interest/total national population of workers for category of interest.

d

Prevalence Ratio is based on comparison to all other US workers, not in the Sector.

Occupations reporting higher rates of working between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m., in comparison to all US workers, included Protective Services (47.4%), Transportation and Material Moving (28.8%), Healthcare Practitioners and Technical (26.3%), Production (21.3%), Installation, Maintenance and Repair (20.5%), and Healthcare Support (18.6%) (Table 5). Those with significantly lower rates include Sales and related (10.1%), Construction and Extraction (9.8%), Building, Grounds Cleaning and Maintenance (9.3%), Office and Administrative Support (8.2%), Business and Financial Operations (6.1%), and Education (4.2%).

Table 5.

Occupations of workers 18 years and older who reported working between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. in the 30 days before participating in the National Health Interview Survey, in the United States, 2015.

Unweighted sample population of respondents who worked overnight Estimated national population who worked overnight Weighted prevalenceb (95% CI) Prevalence ratioc (95% CI)
Total 2779 21,137,000 14.2 (13.5–15.0)
Architecture and engineering 34 366,000 10.8 (7.8–14.4) 0.75 (0.51–1.11)
Arts, design, entertainment, sports and media 67 469,000 15.1 (11.8–18.9) 1.06 (0.79–1.42)
Building and grounds cleaning and maintenance 69 511,000 9.3 (6.9–12.1) 0.64 (0.46–0.91)
Business and financial operations 67 482,000 6.1 (4.7–7.8) 0.41 (0.31–0.55)
Community and social services 46 317,000 10.7 (7.0–15.6) 0.75 (0.49–1.14)
Computer and mathematical 96 776,000 14.8 (11.9–18.1) 1.04 (0.82–1.32)
Construction and extraction 108 663,000 9.8 (7.6–12.3) 0.68 (0.52–0.88)
Education, training, and library 64 398,000 4.2 (2.9–5.7) 0.28 (0.20–0.39)
Farming, fishing, and forestry 41 215,000 20.2 (14.6–26.9) 1.42 (0.95–2.14)
Food preparation and serving related 139 1,109,000 14.8 (12.3–17.5) 1.04 (0.82–1.31)
Healthcare practitioners and technical 293 2,269,000 26.3 (23.3–29.5) 1.95 (1.71–2.22)
Healthcare support 98 630,000 18.6 (15.3–22.3) 1.31 (1.01–1.71)
Installation, maintenance, and repair 113 1,013,000 20.5 (17.1–24.2) 1.46 (1.17–1.82)
Legal a
Life, physical, and social science a
Management 274 2,099,000 13.7 (12.0–15.6) 0.96 (0.83–1.11)
Office and administrative support 208 1,430,000 8.2 (6.9–9.6) 0.54 (0.46–0.64)
Personal care and service 97 585,000 12.0 (9.5–14.9) 0.84 (0.62–1.13)
Production 248 1,927,000 21.3 (18.6–24.2) 1.54 (1.33–1.79)
Protective service 156 1,347,000 47.4 (41.5–53.4) 3.49 (2.92–4.16)
Sales and related 180 1,520,000 10.1 (8.5–12.0) 0.69 (0.57–0.83)
Transportation and material moving 305 2,391,000 28.8 (25.7–32.0) 2.15 (1.88–2.46)

Note: Bold = significant differences.

Abbreviation: CI = confidence interval.

a

Estimate not reported as per NCHS guidelines for < 30 responses in the sample population.

b

Weighted prevalence = estimated national population for category of interest/estimated total national population of workers

c

Prevalence ratio is based on comparison to all other US workers, not in the Sector.

4. Discussion

This study used data from the 2015 NHIS and found that 14% of US workers experienced work occurring between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. Our definition of overnight work reflects the “window of circadian low,” when consistent wakefulness may have the most deleterious health and safety effects [29, 30, 31, 32, 52, 53]. A precise definition of overnight work exposure agreed upon by subject matter experts, government agencies, and professional organizations may provide a better understanding of determinants of occupational health and safety risks [27].

Our prevalence estimate is slightly lower than estimates from a study using pooled NHANES data from 2005 to 2010. While we estimated 14% of workers experienced overnight work, the NHANES study found that 17% of US workers reported usually working between 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. [54]. This minor difference could be attributed to differences in night shift definitions. However, our results were almost five times higher than estimates using the 2004 CPS which reported 3.1% of workers were regularly employed in night shifts (defined as usual hours of work between 9 p.m. and 8 a.m.) [21]. Differences in prevalence across studies suggest there has been a substantial increase in the number of overnight workers from 2004 to 2015. Given that overnight work has been associated with adverse safety and health outcomes, additional policies and programs may be needed to protect this growing population of workers.

Across sociodemographic characteristics, a lower prevalence of overnight work was reported among older age groups. This finding is similar to prior studies and may reflect a higher seniority in their organization and opportunities for “more desirable” circadian‐ and socially‐aligned jobs (e.g., management) and work schedules (e.g., regular daytime shifts) [18, 21, 55]. Our findings of higher prevalence of overnight work among men are consistent with findings reported in prior studies using data from the 1991, 1997, and 2004 CPS [18, 19, 20, 21]. However, our estimates for both men and women employed in overnight work (17.9% and 10.4%) were substantially higher compared to estimates from the 2004 CPS (3.5% for men and 2.6% for women). The discrepancy in findings may reflect differences in the definition of overnight work between the data sets, but more likely due to workforce characteristics and types of jobs available between the years the CPS and NHIS were administered (i.e., 1991, 1997, and 2004, vs. 2015). Gender differences in overnight work have been mainly attributed to more men employed in industries and occupations with nonstandard schedules [18]. It has also been suggested that women take family responsibilities into account when making labor force decisions, such as work schedules [56, 57]. Presser (1991) found that women who were married or had preschool‐aged children had a lower likelihood of working at night [18]. To investigate possible reasons for gender differences in overnight work, we completed additional analyses and found that gender was significantly associated with industry and occupation (p < 0.0001, results not shown). For example, in the Transportation sector, where nonstandard schedules are common, we found that workers were predominantly men (79%), and men were almost twice as likely to be working overnights than women (OR 1.94, 95% CI: 1.43–2.64, results not shown). We also examined gender differences in security work which also requires around‐the‐clock service. Results showed that more men were employed in protective services than women (82% vs 18% respectively, p < 0.0001, results not shown), and overnight workers were twice as likely to be men than women (OR 2.26, 95% CI: 1.62–3.16, results not shown).

We found a higher prevalence of overnight work among some populations with increased risk for adverse occupational safety and health outcomes. Similar to prior studies, we report higher rates of overnight work among non‐Hispanic Black workers, which may reflect the types of occupations in which these populations are most likely to be employed [19, 20, 21]. In 2018, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that Black workers represented more than one‐quarter of those employed as nurses and health aides which may require work at all hours [58]. In a post hoc analysis, we found that race and ethnicity were significantly associated with industry and occupation (p < 0.0001, results not shown). Specifically, we found that compared to other races and ethnicities, a larger proportion of workers in Healthcare Support occupations were non‐Hispanic Black workers (16%, p < 0.0001, results not shown), compared to all other races and ethnicities. Furthermore, overnight workers in this sector were more than twice as likely to be non‐Hispanic Black (OR 2.24, CI: 1.58–3.17).

Our findings of a significant association between education level and overnight work are supported by Daghlas and colleagues, who reported the likelihood of frequent night shift work almost tripled with 3.6 fewer years of education, and may be mediated by occupational attainment [59]. We estimated a lower prevalence of overnight work among non‐US born workers, compared to US‐born workers. However, the underlying reasons are unclear. Recent BLS data also reported that in comparison to US‐born workers, there is slightly higher prevalence of non‐US born workers employed in “Farming, fishing, and forestry” occupations, which require overnight and early morning work (0.5% vs. 1.3%, respectively) [60].

We found that a larger proportion of overnight workers experience short sleep (< 7 h) and long sleep (> 9 h), and is similar to that in prior literature [6, 7, 14, 61, 62]. Work at night can result in significant shifts in sleep timing with negative effects on sleep quality and duration [8, 12]. Short sleep is frequently reported as a consequence of night shifts and has been attributed to circadian disruption and poorer daytime sleep [17, 63]. Longer sleep durations may reflect the need for longer recovery from night shifts among workers who have opportunities for sufficient recovery [64]. However, the NHIS question used to ascertain sleep duration asked about total sleep over a 24‐h period. Therefore, we were unable to determine if sleep was obtained in one episode, or as multiple, short fragments across different parts of the day, and whether participants were reporting sleep on a workday, a non‐workday, or an average of both. A recent study of sleep patterns among workers following a night shift reported that more than half of the participants engaged in biphasic or polyphasic sleep episodes [65]. It is unclear if our study population obtained sleep during work hours (when possible) or after work hours. While napping during night shifts is associated with lower levels of sleepiness at work, maintenance of alertness and performance, and may compensate for shortened sleep‐recovery periods while not at work [7, 63, 66, 67], obtaining multiepisodic sleep is not recommended for optimal health. Following an extensive review of the literature, the National Sleep Foundation issued a consensus statement which advised against fragmenting sleep into multiple episodes during the 24‐h day because “polyphasic sleep schedules, and the sleep deficiency inherent in those schedules, are associated with a variety of adverse physical health, mental health, and performance outcomes” [68].

Our findings confirm prior literature which reported poorer health and health behaviors among night shift workers, compared to regular daytime workers [1, 2, 7, 62]. Similarly, studies have demonstrated that smoking is a mediator between shift work and poor health [69]. Our finding that smoking behavior is associated with overnight work supports findings in prior studies and reviews [62, 70, 71]. Compared to daytime workers, those working nonstandard shifts such as nights, have been reported to be more likely to start smoking and remain smokers, although the underlying causes are not clear [70]. It is hypothesized that the use of smoking or other nicotine products to counteract sleepiness may help to adjust the biological clock to changing work and sleep schedules [62, 70, 72]. However, smoking has also been found to adversely impact sleep quality [73].

Work schedule, not surprisingly, was significantly associated with overnight work. However, among respondents identifying as regular night shift workers, ~20% did not report working overnight in the past 30 days. It may be that those identifying as “regular night shift workers” may not have worked between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. Similarly, some “regular daytime workers” reported working between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. may include those who start work in the early morning hours. This provides an example of how self‐reporting with broad categories may result in exposure misclassification, which can further bias study findings [28]. Additionally, our finding that over 15 million workers in rotating shift and regular day schedules also experience overnight work highlights that many workers may face the same, or even greater, adverse health and safety risks as those who regularly work nights. Therefore, efforts to reduce the risks associated with overnight or early morning shifts may be beneficial for all workers, regardless of their regular work schedule.

Our finding that overnight work is associated with increasing work hours raises concerns about their combined negative effects [9, 10, 11, 17]. Prior literature has found that for many workers, the primary reason for working overnight and longer hours is due to “the nature of the job” [19, 21, 74]. Secondary motivators include increased pay and personal preference [19, 21, 74]. While we found that almost 7% of overnight workers also worked more than 40 h/week, this is more than double the prevalence reported by Presser in 1991 (2.9%). This may suggest a rise in nonstandard work hours and extended shifts. It may also have resulted from the increased prevalence of multiple jobs, as some workers may take on overnight work in addition to daytime work for extra income [75]. Additional jobs can result in more time spent working various shifts and commuting between jobs, less time for sleep and recovery, with increased risk for occupational fatigue and injury [76]. Concerningly, while we found that almost 1 in 5 workers are employed in multiple jobs, an increase in multiple job holdings has been predicted as the economy “moves toward short‐term labor models and online contract platforms grow across industries” [77, 78].

Overnight work has been strongly attributed to industry and occupational requirements. Presser found that industry and occupation are important determinants of nonstandard work schedules, more so than socioeconomic factors such as sex, marital status, presence of children, ethnicity/race, and education [18, 19]. Our findings of higher prevalence of overnight work among industries and occupations which require work at all hours of the day and night is similar to prior studies which used data from the 1991 and 1997 CPS. However, while we found the greatest prevalence among the Transportation, Warehousing, and Utilities sector, prior studies reported a higher proportion of overnight shifts among some Services (i.e., Protective Services) [18, 20]. Differences between study findings may have occurred due to differences in the survey questions, or because of changing workforce demands (e.g., types of jobs and tasks within jobs) and rise in the “just‐in‐time” workforce with consequences for work scheduling [35].

5. Strengths and Limitations

This study uses a large, nationally representative survey of the US population which allowed for reliable estimates of prevalence of overnight work across most sociodemographic, health and occupational characteristics. Our definition of overnight work was more precise than in prior studies, centering around the window of circadian low, and may have reduced the potential for exposure misclassification. However, responses were self‐reported for occurrences in the 30 days prior to being interviewed and may have been limited by recall bias. As such, this may have resulted in an underestimation of the true prevalence of overnight work. There may be concerns that the data for this study were collected in 2015 and may be dated. However, the definition of overnight work (i.e., any work between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m.), based on biological theories of circadian rhythms, has not been repeated in subsequent years of the NHIS [27, 29, 30, 31, 32]. As such, this study provides the most recent update on overnight work in the USA.

6. Conclusions

Our findings suggest that there has been a substantial increase in overnight work in 2015, compared to earlier studies. However, it is unclear which factors may be the most prominent drivers of overnight work between these periods. It would be beneficial to regularly collect information on nonstandard work schedules, such as overnight work, in the NHIS to better identify changing trends, determinants, and risk associated with work hours. We encourage more current surveillance of nonstandard work schedules as technology and global demands change the way we work. It has been suggested that new technologies enable constant connectivity across time zones, blurring the boundaries between work and leisure, and often leading to longer or fragmented work days which may include overnight hours [79]. It is also believed that unpredictable workloads and demand for around‐the‐clock accessibility have led to the development of flexible workforces and a shift toward shorter‐term, alternative work arrangements [80]. These precarious and nonstandard schedules, in turn, can have adverse effects on work–life balance and worker well‐being [81, 82]. To gain empirical evidence of the trends associated with the changing nature of work, it is imperative to include the same detailed questions about work scheduling and practices at regular intervals in national surveys. Studying trends over time can enable us to better understand the future demands on our workforce and what occupational safety and health policies and programs may need to be revised or developed.

Author Contributions

Imelda Wong led all aspects of this study including conceptualizing the study idea, developing the study methodology, leading the statistical analyses, drafting the original manuscript, and revising all versions. Toni Alterman provided senior authorship guidance in using NHIS data, co‐conceptualized the study idea, co‐developed the study methodology, suggested salient socioeconomic, health, and occupational variables to examine for overnight workers, and reviewed all versions of this manuscript. Beverly Hittle co‐conceptualized the study idea, assisted with identifying variables for analyses, and reviewed all versions of the manuscript. Raquel Velazquez‐Kronen assisted with refining the methodology, assisted with identifying variables for analyses and reviewed all versions of the manuscript. I‐Chen Chen co‐led the analyses, conducted all statistical calculations, and reviewed all versions of the manuscript.

Disclosure

This work was prepared while Dr. Imelda Wong, Dr. I‐Chen Chen, and Dr. Velazquez‐Kronen were employed at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The findings and conclusions in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, State of Hawaii, Department of Human Services, or the Office of the Provincial Health Officer, Ministry of Health, British Columbia Government.

Ethics Statement

This paper used free, publicly available deidentified data and therefore did not require ethics approval. The NHIS is approved by the Research Ethics Review Board of the National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the US Office of Management and Budget.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Supporting information

Supplement A variables questions responses 24 20 08.

AJIM-68-1088-s001.docx (37.2KB, docx)

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Sara Luckhaupt, NIOSH Division of Field Studies and Engineering, for providing advice and reviewing the initial draft of this paper. They would also like to acknowledge the staff at the NCHS, and NHIS respondents for their help with the survey.

Wong I. S., Alterman T., Hittle B. M., Velazquez‐Kronen R., and Chen I.‐C., “Prevalence of Overnight Work (1 a.m. to 5 a.m.) Among United States Workers,” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 68 (2025): 1088–1104, 10.1002/ajim.70027.

Institution at which the work was performed: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

Endnotes

1

See e.g., C.F.R. part 46; 21 C.F.R. part 56; 42 U.S.C. §241(d), 5 U.S.C. §552a, 44 U.S.C. §3501 et seq.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in NHIS Data Release at https://archive.cdc.gov/www_cdc_gov/nchs/nhis/nhis_2015_data_release.htm.

References

  • 1. Moreno C. R. C., Marqueze E. C., Sargent C., K. P. Wright, Jr. , Ferguson S. A., and Tucker P., “Working Time Society Consensus Statements: Evidence‐Based Effects of Shift Work on Physical and Mental Health,” Industrial Health 57, no. 2 (2019): 139–157. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Costa G., “Shift Work and Health: Current Problems and Preventive Actions,” Safety and Health at Work 1, no. 2 (2010): 112–123. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Wu Q. J., Sun H., Wen Z. Y., et al., “Shift Work and Health Outcomes: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses of Epidemiological Studies,” Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine 18, no. 2 (2022): 653–662. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Rivera A. S., Akanbi M., O'Dwyer L. C., and McHugh M., “Shift Work and Long Work Hours and Their Association With Chronic Health Conditions: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews With Meta‐Analyses,” PLoS One 15, no. 4 (2020): e0231037. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Bolino M. C., Kelemen T. K., and Matthews S. H., “Working 9‐to‐5? A Review of Research on Nonstandard Work Schedules,” Journal of Organizational Behavior 42, no. 2 (2020): 188–211. [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Boivin D. B. and Boudreau P., “Impacts of Shift Work on Sleep and Circadian Rhythms,” Pathologie Biologie 62, no. 5 (2014): 292–301. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Akerstedt T., “Shift Work and Disturbed Sleep/Wakefulness,” Occupational Medicine 53, no. 2 (2003): 89–94. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Barger L. K., Lockley S. W., Rajaratnam S. M. W., and Landrigan C. P., “Neurobehavioral, Health, and Safety Consequences Associated With Shift Work in Safety‐Sensitive Professions,” Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports 9, no. 2 (2009): 155–164. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Wagstaff A. S. and Sigstad Lie J. A., “Shift and Night Work and Long Working Hours—A Systematic Review of Safety Implications,” Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health 37, no. 3 (2011): 173–185. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Folkard S. and Lombardi D. A., “Modeling the Impact of the Components of Long Work Hours on Injuries and ‘Accidents’,” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 49, no. 11 (2006): 953–963. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Folkard S., “Shift Work, Safety and Productivity,” Occupational Medicine 53, no. 2 (2003): 95–101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Rajaratnam S. M. W., Howard M. E., and Grunstein R. R., “Sleep Loss and Circadian Disruption in Shift Work: Health Burden and Management,” Medical Journal of Australia 199, no. 8 (2013): S11–S15. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Gao Y., Gan T., Jiang L., et al., “Association Between Shift Work and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Dose‐Response Meta‐Analysis of Observational Studies,” Chronobiology International 37, no. 1 (2020): 29–46. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Winkler M. R., Mason S., Laska M. N., Christoph M. J., and Neumark‐Sztainer D., “Does Non‐Standard Work Mean Non‐Standard Health? Exploring Links Between Non‐Standard Work Schedules, Health Behavior, and Well‐Being,” SSM – Population Health 4 (2018): 135–143. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Arlinghaus A., Bohle P., Iskra‐Golec I., Jansen N., Jay S., and Rotenberg L., “Working Time Society Consensus Statements: Evidence‐Based Effects of Shift Work and Non‐Standard Working Hours on Workers, Family and Community,” Industrial Health 57, no. 2 (2019): 184–200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Colligan M. J. and Rosa R. R., “Shiftwork Effects on Social and Family Life,” Occupational Medicine 5, no. 2 (1990): 315–322. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Bushnell P. T., Colombi A., Caruso C. C., and Tak S., “Work Schedules and Health Behavior Outcomes at a Large Manufacturer,” Industrial Health 48, no. 4 (2010): 395–405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Presser H. B., “Job, Family, and Gender: Determinants of Nonstandard Work Schedules Among Employed Americans in 1991,” Demography 32, no. 4 (1995): 577–598. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Presser H. B., “Race‐Ethnic and Gender Differences in Nonstandard Work Shifts,” Work and Occupations 30, no. 4 (2003): 412–439. [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Beers T., “Flexible Work Schedules and Shift Work: Replacing the ‘9‐to‐5’ Workday?,” Monthly Labor Review 123 (2000): 33–40. [Google Scholar]
  • 21. McMenamin T., “A Time to Work: Recent Trends in Shift Work and Flexible Schedules,” Monthly Labor Review 130, no. 12 (2007): 3–15. [Google Scholar]
  • 22. US Census Bureau , “Current Population Survey, May 1991 (Multiple Job Holding and Work Schedules) Technical Documentation,” D1‐C91‐MAYF‐14‐TECH.
  • 23. US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census , “Current Population Survey, May 1997: Work Schedules (ICPSR 2482),” in Inter‐University Consortium for Political and Social Research (US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1998).
  • 24. US Bureau of the Census , “Current Population Survey, May 2004: Work Schedules and Work at Home Supplement File,” Technical Documentation CPS‐04 (2005).
  • 25. Tamers S. L., Streit J., Pana‐Cryan R., et al., “Envisioning the Future of Work to Safeguard the Safety, Health, and Well‐Being of the Workforce: A Perspective From the CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 63, no. 12 (2020): 1065–1084. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Anttila T., Härmä M., and Oinas T., “Working Hours – Tracking the Current and Future Trends,” Industrial Health 59, no. 5 (2021): 285–292. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Knutsson A., “Methodological Aspects of Shift‐Work Research,” Chronobiology International 21, no. 6 (2009): 1037–1047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Flegal K. M., Brownie C., and Haas J., “The Effects of Exposure Misclassification on Estimates of Relative Risk,” American Journal of Epidemiology 123, no. 4 (1986): 736–751. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Stevens R. G., Hansen J., Costa G., et al., “Considerations of Circadian Impact for Defining ‘Shift Work’ in Cancer Studies: IARC Working Group Report,” Occupational and Environmental Medicine 68, no. 2 (2011): 154–162. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Dinges D., Graeber R., Rosekind M., Samel A., and Wegmann H., “Principles and Guidelines for Duty and Rest Scheduling in Commercial Aviation,” NASA Technical Memorandum 110404 (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1996).
  • 31. Powell D., Spencer M. B., Holland D., and Petrie K. J., “Fatigue in Two‐Pilot Operations: Implications for Flight and Duty Time Limitations,” Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 79, no. 11 (2008): 1047–1050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. National Research Council , The Effects of Commuting on Pilot Fatigue (National Research Council, 2011).
  • 33. National Center for Health Statistics , Survey Description, National Health Interview Survey, 2015 (National Center for Health Statistics, 2016).
  • 34. National Center for Health Statistics , National Health Interview Survey, 2015 (National Center for Health Statistics, 2016), https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhis/nhis_2015_data_release.htm.
  • 35. De Stefano V., “The Rise of the ‘Just‐in‐Time Workforce’: On Demand Work, Crowdwork, and Labor Protection in the 'Gig Economy',” Comparative Labor Law and Policy Journal 37, no. 3 (2016): 461–471. [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Datta N., Cheng R., Singh S., et al., Working Without Borders: The Promise and Perils of Online Gig Work (World Bank, 2023), http://hdl.handle.net/10986/40066.
  • 37. National Center for Health Statistics , Design and Estimation for the National Health Interview Survey 2006‐2015: Data Evaluation and Methods Research, Vol Series 2, Number 165 (Department of Health and Human Services, 2014). [PubMed]
  • 38. Ware J., “Preliminary Tests of a 6‐Item General Health Survey: A Patient Application,” in Measuring Functioning and Well‐Being: The Medical Outcomes Study Approach, ed. Stewart A. and Ware J. (Duke University Press, 1992). [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Ware J., “Scoring the SF‐36,” in Health Survey Manual and Interpretation Guide, ed. Ware J., Snow K., Kosinski M., and Gandek B. (Health Institute, New England Medical Center, 1993). [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Ware J. E., Keller S. D., Gandek B., Brazier J. E., and Sullivan M., “Evaluating Translations of Health Status Questionnaires: Methods From the IQOLA Project,” International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 11, no. 3 (1995): 525–551. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Hirshkowitz M., Whiton K., Albert S. M., et al., “National Sleep Foundation's Sleep Time Duration Recommendations: Methodology and Results Summary,” Sleep Health 1, no. 1 (2015): 40–43. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Watson N., Badr M., Belenky G., et al., “Recommended Amount of Sleep for a Healthy Adult: A Joint Consensus Statement of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine and Sleep Research Society,” Journal of Clinical Sleep 11, no. 6 (2015): 591–592. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Office of the Law Revision Counsel USCT‐L, Chapter 8 – Fair Labor Standards Act (§207(a)) (Office of the Law Revision Counsel USCT‐L, 2011).
  • 44. Alterman T., Luckhaupt S. E., Dahlhamer J. M., Ward B. W., and Calvert G. M., “Prevalence Rates of Work Organization Characteristics Among Workers in the US: Data From the 2010 National Health Interview Survey,” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 56, no. 6 (2012): 647–659. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , National Occupational Research Agenda (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2023), https://www.cdc.gov/nora/default.html.
  • 46. Howard J., “NIOSH: A Short History,” American Journal of Public Health 110, no. 5 (2020): 629–630. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Howard J., “Special Issue on Working Hours and Fatigue,” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 65, no. 11 (2022): 825–826. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Parker J., Talih M., Malec D., et al., “National Center for Health Statistics Data Presentation Standards for Proportions: Data Evaluation and Methods Research,” in Vital and Health Statistics, Series 2, Number 175. DHHS Publication No. 2017–1375 (National Center for Health Statistics, 2017). [PubMed]
  • 49. Korn E. and Graubard B., “Confidence Intervals for Proportions With Small Expected Number of Positive Counts Estimated From Survey Data,” Survey Methodology 24, no. 2 (1998): 193–201. [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Kim J. K., Rao J. N. K., and Wang Z., “Hypotheses Testing From Complex Survey Data Using Bootstrap Weights: A Unified Approach,” Journal of the American Statistical Association 119, no. 546 (2024): 1229–1239.
  • 51. Lu Y., “Chi‐Squared Tests in Dual Frame Surveys,” Survey Methodology 40, no. 2 (2014): 323–334. [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Silva I. and Costa D., “Consequences of Shift Work and Night Work: A Literature Review,” Healthcare 11, no. 10 (2023): 1410. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Kryger M., Roth T., and Dement W., Principles and Practice of Sleep Medicine, 6th ed. (Elsevier, 2017). [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Lieberman H. R., Agarwal S., Caldwell J. A., and Fulgoni V. L., “Demographics, Sleep, and Daily Patterns of Caffeine Intake of Shift Workers in a Nationally Representative Sample of the US Adult Population,” Sleep 43, no. 3 (2020): zsz240. 10.1093/sleep/zsz240. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Czeisler C. A., Moore‐Ede M. C., and Coleman R. M., “Rotating Shiftwork Schedules That Disrupt Sleep Are Improved by Applying Circadian Principles,” Science 217 (1982): 460–463. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Bielby W. T. and Bielby D. D., “Family Ties: Balancing Commitments to Work and Family in Dual Earner Households,” American Sociological Review 54, no. 5 (1989): 776–789. [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Duncan R. P. and Perrucci C. C., “Dual Occupation Families and Migration,” American Sociological Review 41, no. 2 (1976): 252–261. [Google Scholar]
  • 58.US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor Force Characteristics by Race and Ethnicity, 2018, Report 1082 (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019).
  • 59. Daghlas I., Richmond R. C., Lane J. M., et al., “Selection Into Shift Work Is Influenced by Educational Attainment and Body Mass Index: A Mendelian Randomization Study in the UK Biobank,” International Journal of Epidemiology 50, no. 4 (2021): 1229–1240. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.US Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Labor Force Characteristics of Foreign‐Born Workers (2022),” Economic News Release, May 18, 2023, USDL‐23‐1013.
  • 61. Pilcher J. J., Lambert B. J., and Huffcutt A. I., “Differential Effects of Permanent and Rotating Shifts on Self‐Report Sleep Length: A Meta‐Analytic Review,” Sleep 23, no. 2 (2000): 1–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Bae M. J., Song Y. M., Shin J. Y., Choi B. Y., Keum J. H., and Lee E. A., “The Association Between Shift Work and Health Behavior: Findings From the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,” Korean Journal of Family Medicine 38, no. 2 (2017): 86–92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Ruggiero J. S. and Redeker N. S., “Effects of Napping on Sleepiness and Sleep‐Related Performance Deficits in Night‐Shift Workers: A Systematic Review,” Biological Research for Nursing 16, no. 2 (2014): 134–142. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Harma M., Karhula K., Puttonen S., et al., “Shift Work With and Without Night Work as a Risk Factor for Fatigue and Changes in Sleep Length: A Cohort Study With Linkage to Records on Daily Working Hours,” Journal of Sleep Research 28, no. 3 (2019): e12658. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Lammers‐van der Holst H. M., Qadri S., Murphy A., et al., “Evaluation of Sleep Strategies Between Night Shifts in Actual Shift Workers,” Sleep Health 10, no. 1 (2024): S108–S111. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Palermo T. A. C., Rotenberg L., Zeitoune R. C. G., Silva‐Costa A., Souto E. P., and Griep R. H., “Napping During the Night Shift and Recovery After Work Among Hospital Nurses,” Revista Latino‐Americana de Enfermagem 23, no. 1 (2015): 114–121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Ribeiro‐Silva F., Rotenberg L., Soares R. E., et al., “Sleep on the Job Partially Compensates for Sleep Loss in Night‐Shift Nurses,” Chronobiology International 23, no. 6 (2006): 1389–1399. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Weaver M. D., Sletten T. L., Foster R. G., et al., “Adverse Impact of Polyphasic Sleep Patterns in Humans: Report of the National Sleep Foundation Sleep Timing and Variability Consensus Panel,” Sleep Health 7, no. 3 (2021): 293–302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Proper K. I., Jaarsma E., Robroek S. J. W., et al., “The Mediating Role of Unhealthy Behavior in the Relationship Between Shift Work and Perceived Health,” BMC Public Health 21 (2021): 1300. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. van Amelsvoort L. G. P. M., Jansen N. W. H., and Kant I., “Smoking Among Shift Workers: More Than a Confounding Factor,” Chronobiology International 23, no. 6 (2006): 1105–1113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Boini S., Bourgkard E., Ferrières J., and Esquirol Y., “What Do We Know About the Effect of Night‐Shift Work on Cardiovascular Risk Factors? An Umbrella Review,” Frontiers in Public Health 10 (2022): 1034195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Adan A. and Sanchez‐Turet M., “Effects of Smoking on Diurnal Variations of Subjective Activation and Mood,” Human Psychopharmacology: Clinical and Experimental 15, no. 4 (2000): 287–293. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Zhang L., Samet J., Caffo B., and Punjabi N. M., “Cigarette Smoking and Nocturnal Sleep Architecture,” American Journal of Epidemiology 164, no. 6 (2006): 529–537. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Barton J., “Choosing to Work at Night: A Moderating Influence on Individual Tolerance to Shift Work,” Journal of Applied Psychology 79, no. 3 (1994): 449–454. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Hipple S., “Multiple Jobholding During the 2000s,” Monthly Labor Review 133, no. 7 (2010): 21–32. [Google Scholar]
  • 76. Marucci‐Wellman H. R., Lin T. C., Willetts J. L., Brennan M. J., and Verma S. K., “Differences in Time Use and Activity Patterns When Adding a Second Job: Implications for Health and Safety in the United States,” American Journal of Public Health 104, no. 8 (2014): 1488–1500. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Campion E. D., Caza B. B., and Moss S. E., “Multiple Jobholding: An Integrative Systematic Review and Future Research Agenda,” Journal of Management 46, no. 1 (2019): 165–191. [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Barley S. R., Bechky B. A., and Milliken F. J., “The Changing Nature of Work: Careers, Identities, and Work Lives in the 21st Century,” Academy of Management Discoveries 3 (2017): 111–115. [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Anttila T., Härmä M., and Oinas T., “Working Hours – Tracking the Current and Future Trends,” Industrial Health 59, no. 5 (2021): 285–292. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Caldbick S., Labonte R., Mohindra K. S., and Ruckert A., “Globalization and the Rise of Precarious Employment: The New Frontier for Workplace Health Promotion,” Global Health Promotion 21, no. 2 (2014): 23–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Katz L. and Krueger A., “Understanding Trends in Alternative Work Arrangements in the United States,” Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences 5, no. 5 (2019): 132–146. 10.7758/RSF.2019.5.5.07. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Edmonds A. T., Sears J. M., O'Connor A., and Peckham T., “The Role of Nonstandard and Precarious Jobs in the Well‐Being of Disabled Workers During Workforce Reintegration,” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 64, no. 8 (2021): 667–679. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supplement A variables questions responses 24 20 08.

AJIM-68-1088-s001.docx (37.2KB, docx)

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in NHIS Data Release at https://archive.cdc.gov/www_cdc_gov/nchs/nhis/nhis_2015_data_release.htm.


Articles from American Journal of Industrial Medicine are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES