Cross-Country Differences in Basal and Stress-Induced Cortisol Secretion in Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Several studies have emphasized the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and inadequate response of the biological stress system. However, other factors related to SES are rarely considered, such as cultural values, social norms, organization, language and communication skills, which raises the need to investigate cross-country differences in stress response. Although some studies have shown differences in cortisol levels between immigrants and natives, there is no cross-country evidence regarding cortisol levels in country-native elders. This is particularly important given the high prevalence of stress-related disorders across nations during aging. The current study examined basal diurnal and reactive cortisol levels in healthy older adults living in two different countries. METHODS: Salivary cortisol of 260 older adults from Canada and Brazil were analyzed. Diurnal cortisol was measured in saliva samples collected at home throughout two working days at awakening, 30 min after waking, 1400 h, 1600 h and before bedtime. Cortisol reactivity was assessed in response to the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) in both populations. RESULTS: Our results showed that even under similar health status, psychological and cognitive characteristics, Brazilian elders exhibited higher basal and stress-induced cortisol secretion compared to the Canadian participants. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that country context may modulate cortisol secretion and could impact the population health.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".