MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120466186 · doi:10.1177/1099800413507128

Approaches to Salivary Cortisol Collection and Analysis in Infants

2013· review· en· W2120466186 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Research For Nursing · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsMount Allison UniversityUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySalivaDevelopmental psychologyData collectionClinical psychologyMedicineInternal medicineStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Salivary cortisol is becoming more commonly utilized as a biologic marker of stress in observational studies and intervention research. However, its use with infants (12 months of age or younger) is less widespread and poses some special challenges to researchers. In order to decide on the most suitable collection procedure for salivary cortisol in infants, a number of criteria should be considered. This article will aid investigators interested in integrating salivary cortisol measurement into their research studies by presenting (1) an overview of the patterns of cortisol secretion in infancy including the development of diurnal rhythm and response to stress; (2) a comparison of the most commonly used approaches for collecting salivary cortisol samples in infants including cotton rope, syringe aspiration technique, filter paper, hydrocellulose microsponge, and the Salimetrics children's swab; (3) a discussion of the factors contributing to heightened cortisol variability in infancy and how these can be limited; (4) analytical issues associated with cortisol measurement; and (5) examples of criteria to consider when choosing a saliva sampling method and lab for conducting assays.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.752
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.234 · 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