4.5 Review

Evaluation and update of the expert consensus guidelines for the assessment of the cortisol awakening response (CAR)

期刊

PSYCHONEUROENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 146, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2022.105946

关键词

CAR; Measurement; Saliva; Adherence; Guidelines; Update

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article reports a critical evaluation and update of current cortisol awakening response (CAR) methodology, presenting an updated and streamlined version of the CAR consensus guidelines. A quantitative evaluation of CAR research shows limited improvement in implementing core recommendations, but evidence confirms the accuracy of the original guidelines. Furthermore, recent technological advances offer potential cost-saving methods for CAR assessment in future research.
The cortisol awakening response (CAR) is frequently assessed in psychobiological (stress) research. Obtaining reliable CAR data, however, requires careful attention to methodological detail. To promote best practice, expert consensus guidelines on the assessment of the CAR were published (Stalder et al., 2016, PNEC). However, it is unclear whether these highly cited guidelines have resulted in actual methodological improvements. To explore this, the PNEC editorial board invited the present authors to conduct a critical evaluation and update of current CAR methodology, which is reported here. (i) A quantitative evaluation of methodological quality of CAR research published in PNEC before and after the guidelines (2013-2015 vs. 2018-2020) was conducted. Disappointingly, results reveal little improvement in the implementation of central recommendations (especially objective time verification) in recent research. (ii) To enable an update of guidelines, evidence on recent de-velopments in CAR assessment is reviewed, which mostly confirms the accuracy of the majority of the original guidelines. Moreover, recent technological advances, particularly regarding methods for the verification of awakening and sampling times, have emerged and may help to reduce costs in future research. (iii) To aid re-searchers and increase accessibility, an updated and streamlined version of the CAR consensus guidelines is presented. (iv) Finally, the response of the PNEC editorial board to the present results is described: potential authors of future CAR research to be published in PNEC will be required to submit a methodological checklist (based on the current guidelines) alongside their article. This will increase transparency and enable reviewers to readily assess the quality of the respective CAR data. Combined, it is hoped that these steps will assist researchers and reviewers in assuring higher quality CAR assessments in future research, thus yielding more reliable and reproducible results and helping to further advance this field of study.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据