Evidence Hub

HPA–SAM Co-Activation Among Racially Diverse, Economically Disadvantaged Early Adolescents: Secondary Analysis with a Preliminary Test of a Multisystem, Person-Centered Approach

Holly T. Pham, J. Bendezú, M. Wadsworth

Biological Psychology, 2023

119 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

Investigating the co-activation of hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) and sympathetic-adrenomedullary (SAM) responses to acute stress can provide insight into how risk might become biologically embedded during early adolescence and improve understanding of what distinguishes physiological dysregulation from normative/expected physiological responses to stress. Evidence has thus far been mixed as to whether symmetric or asymmetric co-activation patterns are associated with higher exposure to chronic stress and poorer mental health outcomes during adolescence. This study expands on a prior multisystem, person-centered analysis of lower-risk, racially homogenous youth by focusing on HPA–SAM co-activation patterns in a higher-risk, racially diverse sample of early adolescents from low-income families (N=119, Mage=11.79 years, 55.5% female, 52.7% mono-racial Black). The present study was conducted by performing secondary analysis of data from the baseline assessment of an intervention efficacy trial. Participants and caregivers completed questionnaires; youth also completed the Trier Social Stress Test-Modified (TSST–M) and provided six saliva samples. Multitrajectory modeling (MTM) of salivary cortisol and alpha-amylase levels identified four HPA–SAM co-activation profiles. In accordance with the asymmetric-risk model, youth exhibiting Low HPA–High SAM (n=46) and High HPA–Low SAM (n=28) profiles experienced more stressful life events, posttraumatic stress, and emotional and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 119 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free