Reference code: | PT/FB/BL-2010-096.05 |
Location: | Arquivo PCA - Pasta 8/2010
|
Title:
| Discrepancies between self-reported and objective sampling delay for the cortisol awakening response (CAR)
|
Publication year: | 2012
|
URL:
| http://www.psychosomatic.org/anmeeting/PastEvents/meeting2012/abstractbooklet.pdf
|
Abstract/Results: | ABSTRACT:
The CAR is frequently studied in participants’ natural environment using self-collection of saliva samples. For measurement of the CAR accurate timing of saliva sampling is crucial; poor adherence to sampling protocol leads to misleading assessments of the CAR. Studies often rely on self-report and exclude samples rated as 10-15 minutes late. This study compared actimeter-determined awakening and electronic monitoring of sampling times with self-reported awakening and sampling times. It also explored demographic, situational or psychosocial correlates of delayed self-report of both awakening and sampling times. Fifty students (mean 21±4.4 y) collected saliva samples on 4 days at 0, 15, 30 and 45 minutes post awakening. Awakening times were determined by wrist-worn actimeters and sampling was monitored by electronic devices (Medication Event Monitoring: MEM). Participants were informed that these devices monitored their adherence to the protocol. Participants also reported their awakening and sample collection times using the usual diary report method. Actimeter-determined awakening was significantly earlier than self-reported awakening - average difference was 8.0±1.5 minutes, (F(1,25)=37.666, p<0.001, K² =.601). Sampling delay was calculated as the average delay for all 4 samples, objective sampling delay was derived from actimeter-determined awakening and MEM. Self-reported delay was derived from self-reported awakening and sampling. Figure 1 shows that objective sampling delay was significantly longer than self-reported delay, (F(1,25)=22.838,p<0.001,K²=.477). Across the 4 days the average objective delay was 10.0±3.6 minutes. Age, social-economic status, trait and state well-being and ill-being, busyness, sleep quality, waking time, and ease were not significantly correlated with either objective or self-reported delay for awakening and sampling. Results suggest that
self-reported awakening and sampling delay differs to that determined by electronic monitoring, this was largely attributable to inaccuracy in determining awakening. Also, no measured variable was related to awakening and sampling delay, suggesting that it may be related to other factors such as sleep inertia following awakening.
|
Accessibility: | Document does not exist in file
|
Language:
| eng
|
Author:
| Smyth, N.
|
Secondary author(s):
| Thorn, L., Evans, P., Hucklebridge, F., Clow, A.
|
Document type:
| Abstract book
|
Number of reproductions:
| 1
|
Reference:
| Smyth, N., Thorn, L., Evans, P., Hucklebridge, F., & Clow, A. (2012). Discrepancies between self-reported and objective sampling delay for the cortisol awakening response (CAR). Abstracts of the American Psychosomatic Society 70th Annual Meeting: “Symptoms and patient reported outcomes” (A - 58). Athens, Greece.
|
Indexed document: | No
|
Keywords: | Cortisol awakening response / Saliva / Actimeter-determined awakening / Self-reported awakening
|
Discrepancies between self-reported and objective sampling delay for the cortisol awakening response (CAR) |