Cited by 30Stress Responses and CortisolChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 8 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Diurnal Cortisol Interacts With Stressful Events to Prospectively Predict Depressive Symptoms in Adolescent Girls

Open access

Abstract

Purpose The aim of present study was to test the diathesis-stress model of depression using baseline cortisol, prospective assessment of depression symptoms, and stressful life events. Methods The sample consisted of 527 adolescent girls aged 13.5 – 15.5 years without major depressive disorder (MDD). At baseline, saliva samples were collected at waking, 30 minutes after waking, and 8 pm on three consecutive days. Diurnal cortisol was indexed by cortisol awakening response (CAR) and area under the curve (AUCg). Stressful events during the preceding interval and current depressive symptoms were assessed 18-months following baseline. Results Stressful events and the interaction of CAR or AUCg with stressful events predicted depressive symptoms at 18-months, even after controlling for baseline depressive symptoms. Specifically, in the face of high levels of stress, baseline blunted CAR or smaller AUCg were associated with future depressive symptoms. This was more apparent for CAR than AUCg. The effect was reversed at low levels of stress, with heightened CAR associated with more severe depressive symptoms. Conclusions Blunted CAR and less daily cortisol output at baseline appear to accentuate the depressogenic effects of stressful events after 18 months, consistent with the diathesis stress model of HPA axis function in depression.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In 527 adolescent girls without baseline MDD, baseline diurnal cortisol interacted with stressful life events to prospectively predict depressive symptoms 18 months later. Blunted cortisol awakening response (CAR) or smaller daily cortisol output (AUCg) predicted greater depressive symptoms under high stress, with the pattern reversing at low stress.

Key findings

  • Stressful events predicted depressive symptoms at 18 months even after controlling for baseline depressive symptoms (p < .001).
  • The CAR × stressful events interaction predicted 18-month depressive symptoms (β = −.18, p = .040), as did the AUCg × stressful events interaction (β = −.27, p = .016); the diurnal slope × stressful events interaction did not (β = .03, p = .698).
  • Under high stress, blunted CAR or smaller AUCg was associated with the steepest increase in depressive symptoms; at low stress, heightened CAR or greater daily cortisol output was associated with more depressive symptoms. The effect size was slightly larger for AUCg than CAR.
  • In hierarchical models, baseline CAR, AUCg, or diurnal slope did not independently predict 18-month depressive symptoms, though when all three cortisol indices were entered simultaneously, only AUCg significantly predicted depressive symptoms (β = −.19, p < .05).

Methods

  • Prospective longitudinal design: 550 adolescent girls aged 13.5–15.5 years (Mage = 14.39, SD = .62) were recruited; 23 were removed as cortisol outliers, leaving N = 527. Exclusion criteria included lifetime MDD, dysthymia, intellectual disabilities, habitual smoking, and medication/disease affecting the HPA axis; 81.6% of the final sample was non-Hispanic White.
  • At baseline, saliva was collected at waking, 30 minutes after waking, and 8 pm over three consecutive days; cortisol indices were CAR, AUCg, and diurnal slope. Depressive symptoms were assessed with the IDAS-II General Depression scale at baseline and 18 months, and stressful events were assessed with the SLES interview at 9 and 18 months.
  • Main analysis was hierarchical multiple regression predicting 18-month depressive symptoms from baseline cortisol and intervening stressful events in step 1 and their interaction in step 2, controlling for age, BMI, pubertal stage, and baseline depressive symptoms.

Limitations

  • The paper states: the sample was female only, so results may differ for male adolescents; the community sample likely had less severe depressive symptoms than clinical/treatment-seeking samples; the narrow age range may have underpowered tests of a three-way interaction with pubertal stage; waking time was self-reported and not objectively verified; and stress on the saliva sampling days was not assessed.
  • Evident from the text: the outcome was self-reported depressive symptoms rather than diagnostic MDD onset, and the study did not have power to test whether pubertal stage explained the direction of effects.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2017.06.005

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

3 of 8 cited sources checked · 2 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

Show all 20 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 9
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 8
14 of 14
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Direct tests of the diathesis-stress model of depression in adolescents are rare.

    “Direct tests of the diathesis-stress model of depression require assessments of depression, diurnal cortisol and stressful events in a prospective design. Such studies of adolescents are rare..”
1 of 1

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Positive correlation described as negative

    Minor

    The text says diurnal slope was negatively associated with both AUCg and CAR, but the reported correlation with CAR is positive (.17).

  • Abstract and results disagree on which cortisol interaction was stronger

    Minor

    The abstract says the high-stress association was more apparent for CAR than AUCg, while the Results section says the effect size was slightly larger for AUCg.

2 of 2

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 39 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 30

Metadata

Authors
Schuler, K. L., Ruggero, C. J., Goldstein, B. L., Perlman, G., Klein, D. N., & Kotov, R.
Affiliations
  • University of North Texas (US)
  • Stony Brook University (US)
Corresponding author
Schuler, Keke L.
Venue
Journal of Adolescent Health
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-12
Volume
61
Issue
6
Pages
767-772
ISSN
1054-139X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2756097366
Cited by
30
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3
FWCI
1.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Adolescent Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH093479)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
diurnal cortisol, cortisol awakening response, area under the curve, life events, depressive symptoms, adolescent girls, diathesis-stress model, hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, blunted cortisol response, depression risk prediction
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Circadian Rhythm, Depression, Disease Susceptibility, Female, Humans, Hydrocortisone, Hypothalamo-Hypophyseal System, Pituitary-Adrenal System, Prospective Studies, Saliva, Stress, Psychological

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

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