ArticleJournal of clinical laboratory analysis2016
Performance Evaluation of a Salivary Amylase Biosensor for Stress Assessment in Military Field Research.
Article in Journal of clinical laboratory analysis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The calming effect of roasted coffee aroma in patients undergoing dental procedures.Scientific reports · 2021Trial
- EEG Mental Stress Assessment Using Hybrid Multi-Domain Feature Sets of Functional Connectivity Network and Time-Frequency Features.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Portable Biosensors for Psychophysiological Stress Monitoring of a Helicopter Crew.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA convenient biosensor for real-time measurement of biomarkers for in-field psychophysiological stress research and military operations is desirable. We evaluated a hand-held device for measuring salivary amylase as a stress marker in medical technicians undergoing combat casualty care training using two different modalities in operating room and field settings.
methodsSalivary amylase activity was measured by two biosensor methods: directly sampling saliva with a test strip placed under the tongue or pipetting a fixed volume of precollected saliva onto the test strip, followed by analyzing the sample on the strip using a biosensor. The two methods were compared for their accuracy and sensitivity to detect the stress response using an enzyme assay method as a standard.
resultsThe measurements from the under-the-tongue method were not as consistent with those from the standard assay method as the values obtained from the pipetting method. The under-the-tongue method did not detect any significant increase in the amylase activity due to stress in the operating room (P > 0.1), in contrast to the significant increases observed using the pipetting method and assay method with a significance level less than 0.05 and 0.1, respectively. Furthermore, the under-the-tongue method showed no increased amylase activity in the field testing, while both the pipetting method and assay method showed increased amylase activity in the same group (P < 0.1).
conclusionThe accuracy and consistency of the biosensors need to be improved when used to directly measure salivary amylase activity under the tongue for stress assessment in military medical training.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.