Dataset Information

Integrating social science and behavioral genetics: testing the origin of socioeconomic disparities in depression using a genetically informed design.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

We tested 3 hypotheses-social causation, social drift, and common cause-regarding the origin of socioeconomic disparities in major depression and determined whether the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and major depression varied by genetic liability for major depression.

Methods

Data were from a sample of female twins in the baseline Virginia Adult Twin Study of Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders interviewed between 1987 and 1989 (n = 2153). We used logistic regression and structural equation twin models to evaluate these 3 hypotheses.

Results

Consistent with the social causation hypothesis, education (odds ratio [OR] = 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66, 0.93; P < .01) and income (OR = 0.93; 95% CI = 0.89, 0.98; P < .01) were significantly related to past-year major depression. Upward social mobility was associated with lower risk of depression. There was no evidence that childhood SES was related to development of major depression (OR = 0.98; 95% CI = 0.89, 1.09; P > .1). Consistent with a common genetic cause, there was a negative correlation between the genetic components of major depression and education (r(2) = -0.22). Co-twin control analyses indicated a protective effect of education and income on major depression even after accounting for genetic liability.

Conclusions

This study utilized a genetically informed design to address how social position relates to major depression. Results generally supported the social causation model.

SUBMITTER: Mezuk B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3786755 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Integrating social science and behavioral genetics: testing the origin of socioeconomic disparities in depression using a genetically informed design.

Mezuk Briana B Myers John M JM Kendler Kenneth S KS

American journal of public health 20130808

<h4>Objectives</h4>We tested 3 hypotheses-social causation, social drift, and common cause-regarding the origin of socioeconomic disparities in major depression and determined whether the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and major depression varied by genetic liability for major depression.<h4>Methods</h4>Data were from a sample of female twins in the baseline Virginia Adult Twin Study of Psychiatric and Substance Use Disorders interviewed between 1987 and 1989 (n = 2153). We used ...[more]

PMID: 23927513

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundObesity and its associated diseases are major health problems characterized by extensive metabolic disturbances. Understanding the causal connections between these phenotypes and variation in metabolite levels can uncover relevant biology and inform novel intervention strategies. Recent studies have combined metabolite profiling with genetic instrumental variable (IV) analysis (Mendelian randomization) to infer the direction of causality between metabolites and obesity, but often omitted a large portion of untargeted profiling data consisting of unknown, unidentified metabolite signals.MethodsWe expanded upon previous research by identifying body mass index (BMI)-associated metabolites in multiple untargeted metabolomics datasets, and then performing bidirectional IV analysis to classify metabolites based on their inferred causal relationships with BMI. Meta-analysis and pathway analysis of both known and unknown metabolites across datasets were enabled by our recently developed bioinformatics suite, PAIRUP-MS.ResultsWe identified ten known metabolites that are more likely to be causes (e.g., alpha-hydroxybutyrate) or effects (e.g., valine) of BMI, or may have more complex bidirectional cause-effect relationships with BMI (e.g., glycine). Importantly, we also identified about five times more unknown than known metabolites in each of these three categories. Pathway analysis incorporating both known and unknown metabolites prioritized 40 enriched (p < 0.05) metabolite sets for the cause versus effect groups, providing further support that these two metabolite groups are linked to obesity via distinct biological mechanisms.ConclusionsThese findings demonstrate the potential utility of our approach to uncover causal connections with obesity from untargeted metabolomics datasets. Combining genetically informed causal inference with the ability to map unknown metabolites across datasets provides a path to jointly analyze many untargeted datasets with obesity or other phenotypes. This approach, applied to larger datasets with genotype and untargeted metabolite data, should generate sufficient power for robust discovery and replication of causal biological connections between metabolites and various human diseases.

Project description:BackgroundDepression leads to poor health outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD). Despite guidelines recommending screening and treatment of depressed patients with CHD, few patients receive optimal care. We applied behavioral and implementation science methods to (1) identify generalizable, multilevel barriers to depression screening and treatment in patients with CHD and (2) develop a theory-informed, multilevel implementation strategy for promoting guideline adoption.MethodsWe conducted a narrative review of barriers to depression screening and treatment in patients with CHD (ie, medications, exercise, cardiac rehabilitation, or therapy) comprising data from 748 study participants. Informed by the behavior change wheel framework and Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change, we defined multilevel target behaviors, characterized determinants (capability, opportunity, motivation), and mapped barriers to feasible, acceptable, and equitable intervention functions and behavior change techniques to develop a multilevel implementation strategy, targeting health care systems/providers and patients.ResultsWe identified implementation barriers at the system/provider level (eg, Capability: knowledge; Opportunity: workflow integration; Motivation: ownership) and patient level (eg, Capability: knowledge; Opportunity: mobility; Motivation: symptom denial). Acceptable, feasible, and equitable intervention functions included education, persuasion, environmental restructuring, and enablement. Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change strategies included learning collaborative, audit, feedback, and educational materials. The final multicomponent strategy (iHeart DepCare) for promoting depression screening/treatment included problem-solving meetings with clinic staff (system); educational/motivational videos, electronic health record reminders/decisional support (provider); and a shared decision-making (electronic shared decision-making) tool with several functions for patients, for example, patient activation, patient treatment selection support.ConclusionsWe applied implementation and behavioral science methods to identify implementation barriers and to develop a multilevel implementation strategy for increasing uptake of depression screening and treatment in patients with CHD as a use case. The multilevel implementation strategy will be evaluated in a future hybrid II effectiveness-implementation trial.

Project description:BackgroundMobile health (mHealth) interventions are increasingly being designed to facilitate health-related behavior change. Integrating insights from behavioral science and design science can help support the development of more effective mHealth interventions. Behavioral Design (BD) and Design Thinking (DT) have emerged as best practice approaches in their respective fields. Until now, little work has been done to examine how BD and DT can be integrated throughout the mHealth design process.ObjectiveThe aim of this scoping review was to map the evidence on how insights from BD and DT can be integrated to guide the design of mHealth interventions. The following questions were addressed: (1) what are the main characteristics of studies that integrate BD and DT during the mHealth design process? (2) what theories, models, and frameworks do design teams use during the mHealth design process? (3) what methods do design teams use to integrate BD and DT during the mHealth design process? and (4) what are key design challenges, implementation considerations, and future directions for integrating BD and DT during mHealth design?MethodsThis review followed the Joanna Briggs Institute reviewer manual and PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) checklist. Studies were identified from MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, and JMIR by using search terms related to mHealth, BD, and DT. Included studies had to clearly describe their mHealth design process and how behavior change theories, models, frameworks, or techniques were incorporated. Two independent reviewers screened the studies for inclusion and completed the data extraction. A descriptive analysis was conducted.ResultsA total of 75 papers met the inclusion criteria. All studies were published between 2012 and 2021. Studies integrated BD and DT in notable ways, which can be referred to as "Behavioral Design Thinking." Five steps were followed in Behavioral Design Thinking: (1) empathize with users and their behavior change needs, (2) define user and behavior change requirements, (3) ideate user-centered features and behavior change content, (4) prototype a user-centered solution that supports behavior change, and (5) test the solution against users' needs and for its behavior change potential. The key challenges experienced during mHealth design included meaningfully engaging patient and public partners in the design process, translating evidence-based behavior change techniques into actual mHealth features, and planning for how to integrate the mHealth intervention into existing clinical systems.ConclusionsBest practices from BD and DT can be integrated throughout the mHealth design process to ensure that mHealth interventions are purposefully developed to effectively engage users. Although this scoping review clarified how insights from BD and DT can be integrated during mHealth design, future research is needed to identify the most effective design approaches.

Project description:BackgroundFew studies have examined socioeconomic disparities in health and behavioral risk factors by gender in Asian countries and in South Korea, specifically. We investigated the relationship between socioeconomic position (education, income, and occupation) and subjective and acute and chronic health outcomes and behavioral risk factors by gender, and compared results from 1998 and 2005, in the Republic of Korea.MethodsWe examined data from a nationally representative stratified random sample of 4213 men and 4618 women from the 1998 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, and 8289 men and 8827 women from the 2005 Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey using General Linear Modeling and multiple logistic regression methods.ResultsControlling for behavioral risk factors (smoking, drinking, obesity, exercise, and sleep), those in lower socioeconomic positions had poorer health outcomes in both self-reported acute and chronic disease and subjective measures; differences were especially pronounced among women. A socioeconomic gradient for education and income was found for both men and women for morbidity and self-reported health status, but the gradient was more pronounced in women. In 1998, the odds ratios (ORs) of higher morbidity for illiterate vs. college educated females was 5.4:1 and 1.9:1 for females in the lowest income quintile vs. the highest. The OR for education decreased in 2005 to 2.9:1 and that for income quintiles remained the same at 1.9:1. The OR of lower self-reported health status for illiterate vs. college educated females was 2.9:1 and 1.6:1 for females in the lowest income quintile vs. the highest in 1998, and 3.3:1 and 2.3:1 in 2005.ConclusionsAmong Korean adults, men and women in lower socioeconomic position, as denoted by education, income, and somewhat less by occupation, experience significantly higher levels of morbidity and lower self-reported health status, even after controlling for standard behavioral risk factors. Disparities were more pronounced for women than for men. Efforts to reduce health disparities in South Korea require attention to the root causes of socioeconomic inequality and gender differences in the impact of socioeconomic position on health.

Dataset Information

Integrating social science and behavioral genetics: testing the origin of socioeconomic disparities in depression using a genetically informed design.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Integrating social science and behavioral genetics: testing the origin of socioeconomic disparities in depression using a genetically informed design.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets