2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2022.105946
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation and update of the expert consensus guidelines for the assessment of the cortisol awakening response (CAR)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
1

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
0
8
1
Order By: Relevance
“…There are several limitations to the current study. First, the present data do not fully conform to the consensus guidelines on the assessment of the CAR ( Stalder et al, 2022 ), which were published after the conception of our study. Most importantly, we did not employ objective measures for the verification of participants’ sampling times.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 70%
“…There are several limitations to the current study. First, the present data do not fully conform to the consensus guidelines on the assessment of the CAR ( Stalder et al, 2022 ), which were published after the conception of our study. Most importantly, we did not employ objective measures for the verification of participants’ sampling times.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 70%
“…It is of note that non-adherence to saliva sampling in ambulatory settings has been shown to exert a significant impact on the resulting cortisol data (114,115) and that the present data does not fully conform to the recently provided consensus guidelines on the assessment of the CAR (116,117), which were published after the conception of our study. Most importantly, we did not employ objective measures for the verification of participants' sampling times.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 63%
“…Most importantly, we did not employ objective measures for the verification of participants' sampling times. Hence, diurnal cortisol data have to be treated with some caution since the possibility of nonadherence-related confounding cannot be excluded (104)(105)(106)(107). We nevertheless addressed the issue of non-adherence through an experience sampling approach based on mobile phones handed out to our participants.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Third, noncompliance to the saliva collection protocol was verified through written records provided by the participants instead of relying on information drawnfrom electronic devices. Consequently, our CAR measurement does not fully adhere to current guidelines (Stalder et al, 2022). Nevertheless, based on the participants' reported sampling times, most complied with the b, standardized regression coefficient.…”
Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%