Early life adversity and health‐risk behaviors: proposed psychological and neural mechanisms

Duffy, Korrina A.; McLaughlin, Katie A.; Green, Paige

doi:10.1111/nyas.13928

Cited by 163 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 224 publications

(442 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

139

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Both an increase in the number of traumatic events early in life and an increase in levels of perceived stress were associated with a higher ventral striatal DA response to amphetamine [ 123 ]. This evidence supports the biological embedding hypothesis [ 124 ] which links ELA to addictive behaviors [ 125 ]. ELA can be viewed as nonspecific because it predisposes individuals to a wide range of addictive behaviors.…”

Section: Trauma and Ptsdsupporting

confidence: 88%

Separating the Signal from the Noise: How Psychiatric Diagnoses Can Help Discern Food Addiction from Dietary Restraint

Wiss

Brewerton

2020

Nutrients

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Converging evidence from both animal and human studies have implicated hedonic eating as a driver of both binge eating and obesity. The construct of food addiction has been used to capture pathological eating across clinical and non-clinical populations. There is an ongoing debate regarding the value of a food addiction “diagnosis” among those with eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa binge/purge-type, bulimia nervosa, and binge eating disorder. Much of the food addiction research in eating disorder populations has failed to account for dietary restraint, which can increase addiction-like eating behaviors and may even lead to false positives. Some have argued that the concept of food addiction does more harm than good by encouraging restrictive approaches to eating. Others have shown that a better understanding of the food addiction model can reduce stigma associated with obesity. What is lacking in the literature is a description of a more comprehensive approach to the assessment of food addiction. This should include consideration of dietary restraint, and the presence of symptoms of other psychiatric disorders (substance use, posttraumatic stress, depressive, anxiety, attention deficit hyperactivity) to guide treatments including nutrition interventions. The purpose of this review is to help clinicians identify the symptoms of food addiction (true positives, or “the signal”) from the more classic eating pathology (true negatives, or “restraint”) that can potentially elevate food addiction scores (false positives, or “the noise”). Three clinical vignettes are presented, designed to aid with the assessment process, case conceptualization, and treatment strategies. The review summarizes logical steps that clinicians can take to contextualize elevated food addiction scores, even when the use of validated research instruments is not practical.

show abstract

Section: Trauma and Ptsdsupporting

confidence: 88%

Separating the Signal from the Noise: How Psychiatric Diagnoses Can Help Discern Food Addiction from Dietary Restraint

Wiss

Brewerton

2020

Nutrients

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Maltreatment has been found to be associated with consequent heightened neural response to signals of threat [53]. Moreover, while emotional reactivity is increased, emotion regulation is decreased [54]. This suggests that children and adolescents who have experienced adversity before the pandemic are at higher risk to develop anxiety and adopt dysfunctional strategies to manage the COVID-19-associated challenges.…”

Section: Focus On High Risk Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges and burden of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: a narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality

Fegert

Vitiello

Plener

et al. 2020

Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health

1,526

1,439

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is profoundly affecting life around the globe. Isolation, contact restrictions and economic shutdown impose a complete change to the psychosocial environment in affected countries. These measures have the potential to threaten the mental health of children and adolescents significantly. Even though the current crisis can bring with it opportunities for personal growth and family cohesion, disadvantages may outweigh these benefits. Anxiety, lack of peer contact and reduced opportunities for stress regulation are main concerns. Another main threat is an increased risk for parental mental illness, domestic violence and child maltreatment. Especially for children and adolescents with special needs or disadvantages, such as disabilities, trauma experiences, already existing mental health problems, migrant background and low socioeconomic status, this may be a particularly challenging time. To maintain regular and emergency child and adolescent psychiatric treatment during the pandemic is a major challenge but is necessary for limiting long-term consequences for the mental health of children and adolescents. Urgent research questions comprise understanding the mental health effects of social distancing and economic pressure, identifying risk and resilience factors, and preventing long-term consequences, including-but not restricted to-child maltreatment. The efficacy of telepsychiatry is another highly relevant issue is to evaluate the efficacy of telehealth and perfect its applications to child and adolescent psychiatry. Conclusion: There are numerous mental health threats associated with the current pandemic and subsequent restrictions. Child and adolescent psychiatrists must ensure continuity of care during all phases of the pandemic. COVID-19-associated mental health risks will disproportionately hit children and adolescents who are already disadvantaged and marginalized. Research is needed to assess the implications of policies enacted to contain the pandemic on mental health of children and adolescents, and to estimate the risk/benefit ratio of measures such as home schooling, in order to be better prepared for future developments.

show abstract

“…Essential co-variates: ELA is, however, associated with a range of negative health behaviors (reviewed in [136]) including an increased risk of smoking as well as increased smoking levels, levels of alcohol consumption, and poor diet leading to either malnourishment or obesity. The psychobiological and neurodevelopmental mechanisms linking ELA and risky health behaviors are starting to be dissected [137].…”

Section: Int J Mol Sci 2020 21 X For Peer Review 8 Of 22mentioning

confidence: 99%

The COVID-19 Pandemic: Does Our Early Life Environment, Life Trajectory and Socioeconomic Status Determine Disease Susceptibility and Severity?

Holuka

Merz

Fernandes

et al. 2020

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A poor socioeconomic environment and social adversity are fundamental determinants of human life span, well-being and health. Previous influenza pandemics showed that socioeconomic factors may determine both disease detection rates and overall outcomes, and preliminary data from the ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic suggests that this is still true. Over the past years it has become clear that early-life adversity (ELA) plays a critical role biasing the immune system towards a pro-inflammatory and senescent phenotype many years later. Cytotoxic T-lymphocytes (CTL) appear to be particularly sensitive to the early life social environment. As we understand more about the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 it appears that a functional CTL (CD8+) response is required to clear the infection and COVID-19 severity is increased as the CD8+ response becomes somehow diminished or exhausted. This raises the hypothesis that the ELA-induced pro-inflammatory and senescent phenotype may play a role in determining the clinical course of COVID-19, and the convergence of ELA-induced senescence and COVID-19 induced exhaustion represents the worst-case scenario with the least effective T-cell response. If the correct data is collected, it may be possible to separate the early life elements that have made people particularly vulnerable to COVID-19 many years later. This will, naturally, then help us identify those that are most at risk from developing the severest forms of COVID-19. In order to do this, we need to recognize socioeconomic and early-life factors as genuine medically and clinically relevant data that urgently need to be collected. Finally, many biological samples have been collected in the ongoing studies. The mechanisms linking the early life environment with a defined later-life phenotype are starting to be elucidated, and perhaps hold the key to understanding inequalities and differences in the severity of COVID-19.

show abstract

Early life adversity and health‐risk behaviors: proposed psychological and neural mechanisms

Cited by 163 publications

References 224 publications

Separating the Signal from the Noise: How Psychiatric Diagnoses Can Help Discern Food Addiction from Dietary Restraint

Separating the Signal from the Noise: How Psychiatric Diagnoses Can Help Discern Food Addiction from Dietary Restraint

Challenges and burden of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: a narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality

The COVID-19 Pandemic: Does Our Early Life Environment, Life Trajectory and Socioeconomic Status Determine Disease Susceptibility and Severity?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About