↓ Skip to main content

Measurement of cortisol in saliva: a comparison of measurement error within and between international academic-research laboratories

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Measurement of cortisol in saliva: a comparison of measurement error within and between international academic-research laboratories
Published in
BMC Research Notes, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-2805-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica L. Calvi, Frances R. Chen, Victoria Brann Benson, Eleanor Brindle, Matt Bristow, Alpana De, Sonja Entringer, Helen Findlay, Christine Heim, Eric A. Hodges, Heiko Klawitter, Sonia Lupien, Holly M. Rus, Jitske Tiemensma, Silvanna Verlezza, Claire-Dominique Walker, Douglas A. Granger

Abstract

Hundreds of scientific publications are produced annually that involve the measurement of cortisol in saliva. Intra- and inter-laboratory variation in salivary cortisol results has the potential to contribute to cross-study inconsistencies in findings, and the perception that salivary cortisol results are unreliable. This study rigorously estimates sources of measurement variability in the assay of salivary cortisol within and between established international academic-based laboratories that specialize in saliva analyses. One hundred young adults (Mean age: 23.10 years; 62 females) donated 2 mL of whole saliva by passive drool. Each sample was split into multiple- 100 µL aliquots and immediately frozen. One aliquot of each of the 100 participants' saliva was transported to academic laboratories (N = 9) in the United States, Canada, UK, and Germany and assayed for cortisol by the same commercially available immunoassay. 1.76% of the variance in salivary cortisol levels was attributable to differences between duplicate assays of the same sample within laboratories, 7.93% of the variance was associated with differences between laboratories, and 90.31% to differences between samples. In established-qualified laboratories, measurement error of salivary cortisol is minimal, and inter-laboratory differences in measurement are unlikely to have a major influence on the determined values.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 26%
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Researcher 5 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Sports and Recreations 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 7 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,744,141
of 11,774,002 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,105
of 2,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,609
of 265,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#19
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,774,002 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,592 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,079 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.