MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059995600 · doi:10.1177/1099800402238334

Stress Hormones: How Do They Measure Up?

2002· review· en· W2059995600 on OpenAlexaff
Shirley Linda King

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Research For Nursing · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of CanadaMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStressorStress (linguistics)Chronic stressAllostasisPsychological interventionPsychologyStress measuresPsychological stressHormoneMedicineClinical psychologyNeurosciencePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stress as a stimulus is integral to dynamic homeostatic functioning. However, evidence of its potentially deleterious effects on health is mounting. The impetus to understand the mechanisms that underlie stress-related negative health outcomes and prevent the development of stress-related disorders has never been greater. Symptom severity and subjective levels of stress, although frequently assessed in studies of stress in nursing research, may not provide adequate data to fully understand the pervasive effects of chronic or overwhelming stress associated with stress disorders. The measurement of stress hormones such as cortisol can help identify bodily changes that are stressor specific, people at risk for development of stress-related disorders, and the efficacy of interventions aimed at stress reduction. Cortisol, as the peripheral output of one of the major stress response systems, possesses several properties that make its measurement highly useful for investigations of stress. This article discusses some of the biological mechanisms involved in the stress response, why cortisol is commonly measured, and issues and approaches in cortisol measurement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.010
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.631
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.120 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations161
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological Research For NursingSame topicStress Responses and CortisolFrench-language works237,207