26
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A systematic review of the Trier Social Stress Test methodology: Issues in promoting study comparison and replicable research

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Since its development in 1993, the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) has been used widely as a psychosocial stress paradigm to activate the sympathetic nervous system and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis (HPAA) stress systems, stimulating physiological functions (e.g. heart rate) and cortisol secretion. Several methodological variations introduced over the years have led the scientific community to question replication between studies. In this systematic review, we used the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) to synthesize procedure-related data available about the TSST protocol to highlight commonalities and differences across studies. We noted significant discrepancies across studies in how researchers applied the TSST protocol. In particular, we highlight variations in testing procedures (e.g., number of judges, initial number in the arithmetic task, time of the collected saliva samples for cortisol) and discuss possible misinterpretation in comparing findings from studies failing to control for variables or using a modified version from the original protocol. Further, we recommend that researchers use a standardized background questionnaire when using the TSST to identify factors that may influence physiological measurements in tandem with a summary of this review as a protocol guide. More systematic implementation and detailed reporting of TSST methodology will promote study replication, optimize comparison of findings, and foster an informed understanding of factors affecting responses to social stressors in healthy people and those with pathological conditions.

          Related collections

          Most cited references144

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement

          Systematic reviews should build on a protocol that describes the rationale, hypothesis, and planned methods of the review; few reviews report whether a protocol exists. Detailed, well-described protocols can facilitate the understanding and appraisal of the review methods, as well as the detection of modifications to methods and selective reporting in completed reviews. We describe the development of a reporting guideline, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols 2015 (PRISMA-P 2015). PRISMA-P consists of a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. Funders and those commissioning reviews might consider mandating the use of the checklist to facilitate the submission of relevant protocol information in funding applications. Similarly, peer reviewers and editors can use the guidance to gauge the completeness and transparency of a systematic review protocol submitted for publication in a journal or other medium.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            A Global Measure of Perceived Stress

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales.

              In recent studies of the structure of affect, positive and negative affect have consistently emerged as two dominant and relatively independent dimensions. A number of mood scales have been created to measure these factors; however, many existing measures are inadequate, showing low reliability or poor convergent or discriminant validity. To fill the need for reliable and valid Positive Affect and Negative Affect scales that are also brief and easy to administer, we developed two 10-item mood scales that comprise the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). The scales are shown to be highly internally consistent, largely uncorrelated, and stable at appropriate levels over a 2-month time period. Normative data and factorial and external evidence of convergent and discriminant validity for the scales are also presented.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Neurobiol Stress
                Neurobiol Stress
                Neurobiology of Stress
                Elsevier
                2352-2895
                15 June 2020
                November 2020
                15 June 2020
                : 13
                : 100235
                Affiliations
                [a ]Behavioural Neuroscience Group, School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, 136 Jean-Jacques Lussier, Ottawa, On, K1N 6N5, Canada
                [b ]Cognition & Anxiety Disorders Research Laboratory, School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, 136 Jean-Jacques Lussier, Ottawa, On, K1N 6N5, Canada
                [c ]University of Ottawa Library, 120 University Private, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. University of Ottawa, School of Psychology, Behavioral Neuroscience Group, 136 Jean-Jacques Lussier, Vanier building, room 2082, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5, Canada. Helene.Plamondon@ 123456uottawa.ca
                [1]

                both researchers contributed equally to this manuscript.

                Article
                S2352-2895(20)30025-4 100235
                10.1016/j.ynstr.2020.100235
                7739033
                33344691
                03bd4421-8dd5-4ff1-9c66-680e3e8fa028
                © 2020 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 20 April 2020
                : 18 May 2020
                : 19 May 2020
                Categories
                Review article

                trier social stress test,stress paradigm,protocol,systematic review,standardization

                Comments

                Comment on this article