Repeated salivary daytime cortisol and onset of mood episodes in offspring of bipolar parents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Differences in cortisol secretion may differentiate individuals at high compared to low genetic risk for bipolar disorder (BD) and predict the onset or recurrence of mood episodes. The objectives of this study were to determine if salivary cortisol measures are: (1) different in high-risk offspring of parents with BD (HR) compared to control offspring of unaffected parents (C), (2) stable over time, (3) associated with the development of mood episode onset/recurrence, and (4) influenced by comorbid complications. METHODS: Fifty-three HR and 22 C completed salivary cortisol sampling annually for up to 4 years in conjunction with semi-structured clinical interviews. The cortisol awakening response (CAR), daytime cortisol [area under the curve (AUC)], and evening cortisol (8:00 p.m.) were calculated. RESULTS: There were no differences in baseline CAR, AUC and evening cortisol between HR and C (p = 0.38, p = 0.30 and p = 0.84), respectively. CAR, AUC and evening cortisol were stable over yearly assessments in HR, while in Cs, evening cortisol increased over time (p = 0.008), and CAR and AUC remained stable. In HR, AUC and evening cortisol increased the hazard of a new onset mood disorder/recurrence by 2.7 times (p = 0.01), and 3.5 times (p = 0.01), respectively, but this was no longer significant after accounting for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Salivary cortisol is stable over time within HR offspring. However, between individuals, basal salivary cortisol is highly variable. More research is needed, with larger samples of prospectively studied HR youth using a more reliable method of cortisol measurement, to determine the potential role of cortisol in the development of mood disorders.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".