Cortisol awakening response in children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The cortisol awakening response (CAR) is characterised by an increase in cortisol in the 30 to 60 min after waking. Research has found significant associations between an atypical CAR and symptoms of stress and anxiety in typically developing (TD) children and adolescents. A number of studies have explored the CAR in autism spectrum disorder (ASD), but no evidence synthesis is available to date. Objective and methods Based on a preregistered protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42017051187), we carried out a systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) of CAR studies to explore potential significant differences between children and adolescents with ASD and TD controls. Web of Science, PubMed and PsychInfo were searched until January 2019. A random-effects model was used to pool studies and we used the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) to assess study quality and risk of bias. Findings The SR retrieved a total of nine studies, with mixed findings on the comparison of the CAR between children and adolescents with ASD and TD controls. The MA, based on four studies (ASD; n=117 and TD n=118), suggested no differences between the CAR in ASD and TD populations (SMD: −0.21, 95% CI −0.49 to 0.08). In terms of NOS items, no study specifiedRepresentativeness of the casesandNon-response rate. Discussion and clinical implications Given the relatively few studies and lack of appropriately matched TD controls, additional research is needed to further understand and recommend the utility of the CAR as a reliable marker to differentiate ASD and TD.
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 | 0.011 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.016 | 0.028 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".