Cited by 149Stress Responses and CortisolEstrogen and related hormone effectsNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior

Assessing estradiol in biobehavioral studies using saliva and blood spots: simple radioimmunoassay protocols, reliability, and comparative validity

Shirtcliff, Elizabeth A., Granger, Douglas A., Schwartz, Eve B., Curran, Mary J., Booth, Alan, Overman, William H.·2000·Hormones and Behavior

Abstract

We developed simple, reliable, and highly sensitive assay modifications of commercially available radioimmunoassay kits to measure estradiol in saliva and blood spot specimens. The saliva assay has average intra- and interassay coefficients of variation (CV) of 6.45 and 9.01%, with average analytical and serial dilution recoveries 100.65 and 89.25%. The blood spot assay has average intra- and interassay CVs of 7.57 and 8.22%, with analytical and serial dilution recoveries of 80.50 and 108.50%. The analytical sensitivity ranges of the saliva (0.25-7.50 pg/ml) and blood spot (2. 00-375 pg/ml) assays are sufficient to determine levels in the majority of pre- and postpubertal males and females. Blood spot assay results are correlated with serum estradiol levels for adult males, r (17) = 0.73, and females, r (18) = 0.96. In contrast, the serum-saliva correlation is only modest for adult females, r (14) = 0.60, and not significant for adult males. Substitution of blood spot assay results for serum values underestimates the known serum estradiol-behavior correlation by only 3.45%, whereas substitution of saliva assay results for serum values underestimates the association by 37.55%. The findings have important implications for the use and potential misuse of noninvasive measures of estradiol in studies of health and human development.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1006/hbeh.2000.1614

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shirtcliff, E. A., Granger, D. A., Schwartz, E. B., Curran, M. J., Booth, A., & Overman, W. H.
Affiliations
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
  • University of North Carolina Wilmington (US)
Corresponding author
Granger, Douglas A.
Venue
Hormones and Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-09
Volume
38
Issue
2
Pages
137-147
ISSN
0018-506X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2059529385
Cited by
149
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Hormones and Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Estrogen and related hormone effects
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Keywords
estradiol, saliva, blood spots, radioimmunoassay, assay modification, assay reliability, serum estradiol, non-invasive hormone measurement, human development
MeSH terms
Adult, Aging, Behavior, Child, Estradiol, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Female, Humans, Male, Puberty, Radioimmunoassay, Reagent Kits, Diagnostic, Saliva

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review