4.3 Article

Investigating relations among stress, sleep and nail cortisol and DHEA

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10253890.2018.1429398

关键词

Fingernails; cortisol; DHEA; sleep; self-regulation; stress; self-control

资金

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [K23MH107714] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [K23 MH107714] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the current study, we present data investigating the relationships among stress, sleep disturbance, self-control, and levels of cortisol (CORT) and dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) in fingernail clippings. Currently, hair CORT is the only routinely used noninvasive, validated, biomarker of chronic exposure to stress-related hormones. Nail clippings represent an important potential alternative sample matrix for assessing chronic hormone exposure, as it offers a different timeline of hormone incorporation than scalp hair, and may be obtainable from populations in which hair either is lacking or is unavailable for cultural reasons. Moreover, there is established precedent for using fingernail clippings to attain biomarker data. However, the value of nail hormone assessment for psychological research is currently unknown due to a paucity of information on the relations between nail hormone concentrations and environmental or psychological variables. In the present study, we collected data from a low income, minority population (N=47; 97% African American) to demonstrate feasibility and acceptability of nail collection and analysis of the adrenal steroids CORT and DHEA. Participants reported on perceived stress, sleep and self-control abilities. Correlational analyses suggest that exposure to stressful events, disturbances in sleep and waking were associated with higher levels of nail DHEA, while self-control was associated with higher levels of nail CORT. We discuss the potential importance of this methodology for investigating biological, behavioral, and subjective indices of stress and well-being.

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

4.3
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