RNCohortWestern journal of nursing research2026

Hair Cortisol as a Biomarker of Chronic Stress in Community-Dwelling Adults With Longstanding Multiple Sclerosis.

Nani Kim, Alexa K Stuifbergen, Heather Becker and 3 others

PMID 41580609

WHAT IT FOUND

Mailed hair samples were returned by 59.6% of consenting adults with longstanding MS; 84.4% were eligible for cortisol analysis, but cortisol did not track reported stress.

Key findings

01Hair sample collection by mail was feasible: 90 of 151 consenting participants returned samples (59.6%), and 76 of 90 returned samples were eligible for cortisol analysis (84.4%).

02Hair cortisol did not significantly correlate with perceived stress in the final 75 participants.

03The regression model did not explain hair cortisol overall, but employed participants had higher hair cortisol than non-employed participants.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study was cross-sectional, so it cannot show whether stress, hair cortisol, or MS outcomes came first. The final analysis included only 75 participants, and the sample was mostly older, white, female, retired, and had longstanding MS. This restricts generalisability. Only 5 male participants were included, and the authors note that sex differences in hair cortisol may have affected the observed levels. The sample's median perceived stress was 12 on a 0 to 40 scale, which may have made a relationship with hair cortisol hard to detect. The study did not assess specific stressors, their duration, severity, or controllability. It did not control for alcohol use, smoking, detailed current medication use, or hair care practices that can influence hair cortisol. Hair cortisol and perceived stress covered different time windows, which makes direct comparison difficult. Self-collection adherence could not be verified, and some samples were unusable because of orientation loss, colored hair, or insufficient length or weight. The regression model was not significant overall, and subgroup analyses by MS type were also not significant, so the employment finding should be treated cautiously.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read the 59.6% return rate as evidence that hair cortisol measures chronic stress in MS. It only shows that mailed self-collection was feasible; cortisol did not track perceived stress.

Read it on PubMed →