Abstract
Hair segment analysis is a valuable tool for the assessment of cumulative long-term steroid secretion. Preliminary findings suggest comparable cortisol concentrations in hair collected by instructed laypersons and research staff. However, it remains unclear whether hair sample quality and hair steroids other than cortisol are affected by level of experience (laypersons vs. research staff), home collection circumstances (instructions, familiarity to participant, performance confidence), and characteristics of the layperson (conscientiousness). Sixty participants (23.6 ± 3.9 years; 43 females) provided hair samples twice: first collected by laypersons (HOME) according to provided instructions (written vs. written/video-based instructions) and second by trained research staff (LAB) on the same day or the day after the HOME collection. Hair steroid concentrations (cortisol, cortisone, DHEA, progesterone) were determined using LC–MS/MS. Hair sample quality was evaluated using nine predefined criteria. Laypersons completed questionnaires for the assessment of potential factors of hair outcome measures (hair steroid concentrations, hair sample quality). Hair steroids from HOME and LAB samples were positively correlated (rs between 0.76 and 0.89) and did not significantly differ, with the exception of cortisone. The quality of hair samples was significantly higher for LAB than for HOME samples. Neither HOME collection circumstances nor layperson-related characteristics had an impact on hair outcome measures. However, a low self-reported performance confidence predicted a high absolute difference between HOME and LAB DHEA. In summary, our findings suggest higher quality of hair samples collected by trained research staff compared to instructed laypersons. However, these differences might be negligible, considering the high correlation between HOME and LAB hair steroid concentrations, with the characteristics of the layperson or collection circumstances having a minor impact on hair steroids and hair sample quality. These findings provide further support for the notion that well-instructed laypersons can be enabled to collect hair samples.
Highlights
Hair analysis has a long history in the field of forensics, toxicology, and drug and doping control due to the retrospective assessment of long-term incorporation and storage of various substances in the hair shaft (e.g., Cooper et al 2012)
We explore whether hair steroid concentrations differ between HOME and LAB samples, depending on the format of instructions (2.1) and the quality of the hair sample (2.2)
Hair steroid concentrations and quality of hair samples collected by laypersons and trained research staff (1.1, 1.2, 1.3)
Summary
Hair analysis has a long history in the field of forensics, toxicology, and drug and doping control due to the retrospective assessment of long-term incorporation and storage of various substances in the hair shaft (e.g., Cooper et al 2012). Ouellet-Morin et al (2016) were the first to address this issue by creating an adapted hair collection kit including collection materials (curved scissors, hair clamps, collection card), a hair characteristics questionnaire, and written and illustrated instructions, which can be mailed back and forth between the laboratory and the participant’s home. For their validation study, thirty-four adolescents were asked to collect a hair sample at home, with the help of a familiar person and the hair collection kit.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
