Social Experience and the Developing Brain: Opportunities for Social Epidemiologists in the Era of Population-Based Neuroimaging

LeWinn, Kaja Z.; Shih, Emily

doi:10.1007/s40471-019-00222-4

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 101 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It thus appears that fathers’ education captures a substantial proportion of the association between parental quality and cranial growth of their offspring. This finding is consistent with anthropometric ( Gale et al, 2004 ) and brain imaging studies demonstrating lasting associations between parental socioeconomic status and/or education vs. brain structure, growth, development, and functioning (reviewed by Leijser et al, 2018 ; LeWinn and Shih, 2019 ). The current study does not enable distinguishing whether the association between paternal education and children’s cranial volume was primarily of environmental or genetic origin.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…The current study does not enable distinguishing whether the association between paternal education and children’s cranial volume was primarily of environmental or genetic origin. Although improvement of the growth environment can enhance head growth ( Hõrak and Valge, 2015 ; Leijser et al, 2018 ; LeWinn and Shih, 2019 ), it is also well established that most variables traditionally thought of as markers of the quality of growth environment also reflect genetic variability (e.g., Turkheimer et al, 2003 ). For instance, the genetic correlation between household income and infant intracranial volume in the UK Biobank sample was 0.53 ( Hill et al, 2016 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adolescent Cranial Volume as a Sensitive Marker of Parental Investment: The Role of Non-material Resources?

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Growth of different body parts in humans is sensitive to different resource constraints that are mediated by parental investment. Parental investment can involve the expenditure of material, cognitive, and emotional resources on offspring. Cranial volume, an important predictor of cognitive ability, appears understudied in this context. We asked (1) whether there are associations between growth and family structure, self-reported estimates for resource availability, and sibling number; and (2) whether these constraints relate to head and body growth in a similar manner. We assessed the associations between parental investment, height, and cranial volume in a cross-sectional study of Estonian children (born 1980–87, aged 11–17). Height correlated negatively with the number of siblings but this association became negligible in a model controlling for birthweight, parental heights, and mother’s age at birth. Unlike height, cranial volume was unrelated to sibling number, but it was negatively associated with self-reported meat and general resource shortage. Cranial volume was related to family structure and paternal education. Children living with both birth-parents had larger heads than those living in families containing a step-parent. Since these family types did not differ with respect to meat or general resource shortage, our findings suggest that families including both genetic parents provide non-material benefits that stimulate predominantly cranial growth. For the studied developmental period, cranial volume appeared a more sensitive marker of growth constraints than height. The potential of using cranial volume for quantifying physical impact of non-material parental investment deserves further attention.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adolescent Cranial Volume as a Sensitive Marker of Parental Investment: The Role of Non-material Resources?

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the long history and geographic spread of these associations, SES has largely been ignored by pain neuroimaging research. There are several reasons for this: First, there is little communication between epidemiologists and neuroimagers [an effort to correct this has begun, see ( 70 )]. Second, the lack of socioeconomic diversity in research samples obfuscates this connection.…”

Section: Social Epidemiologic (Society-based) Approach To Prevention-relevant Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommendations for the Development of Socioeconomically-Situated and Clinically-Relevant Neuroimaging Models of Pain

Reddan

2021

Front. Neurol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pain is a complex, multidimensional experience that emerges from interactions among sensory, affective, and cognitive processes in the brain. Neuroimaging allows us to identify these component processes and model how they combine to instantiate the pain experience. However, the clinical impact of pain neuroimaging models has been limited by inadequate population sampling – young healthy college students are not representative of chronic pain patients. The biopsychosocial approach to pain management situates a person's pain within the diverse socioeconomic environments they live in. To increase the clinical relevance of pain neuroimaging models, a three-fold biopsychosocial approach to neuroimaging biomarker development is recommended. The first level calls for the development of diagnostic biomarkers via the standard population-based (nomothetic) approach with an emphasis on diverse sampling. The second level calls for the development of treatment-relevant models via a constrained person-based (idiographic) approach tailored to unique individuals. The third level calls for the development of prevention-relevant models via a novel society-based (social epidemiologic) approach that combines survey and neuroimaging data to predict chronic pain risk based on one's socioeconomic conditions. The recommendations in this article address how we can leverage pain's complexity in service of the patient and society by modeling not just individuals and populations, but also the socioeconomic structures that shape any individual's expectations of threat, safety, and resource availability.

show abstract

“…Development of a brain is shaped by numerous social factors. The rapidly growing body of knowledge highlights the social influence on brain development [1][2][3][4][5][6] . Existing studies on the relationship between neighborhood conditions and child developmental outcomes provide solid evidence of significant relationship between the two 7,8 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sociomarkers and Connectomes: Neurodevelopmental Imprints in Adolescent Brains

Shin,

Kang,

Lee

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neural consequences of social disparities are not yet rigorously investigated. How socioeconomic conditions influence children’s connectome development remains unknown. This paper endeavors to gauge how precisely the connectome structure of the brain can predict an individual’s social environment, thereby inversely assessing how social influences are engraved in the neural development of the adolescent brain. The analysis has been performed over an integrated dataset consisting of brain imaging data and household level socioeconomic conditions from the Adolescent Brain and Cognition Development (ABCD) data (9,099 children residing in the United States) - and local poverty prevalence and neighborhood education level from the US census data. Using this uniquely integrated database, we found that social conditions both at the household and neighborhood levels are significantly associated with specific neural connections. Solely with brain connectome data, we train a linear support vector machine (SVM) to predict socioeconomic conditions of those adolescents. Hispanic participants achieved higher accuracy rates than White and African American children, except for the household Income level. Hispanic participants exhibited the highest accuracy rate of 0.71 and the best AUPRC of 0.77 for predicting neighborhood level educational attainment. Accuracy 0.85 for the household income and neighborhood education dual combination cases and 0.81 for the household education and neighborhood education dual condition. Furthermore, we identified 8 significant connections that critically contribute to predicting social environments in the parietal lobe and frontal lobe. Insights into social factors that contribute to early brain connectome development is critical to mitigate the disadvantages of children growing up in unfavorable neighborhoods.

show abstract

Social Experience and the Developing Brain: Opportunities for Social Epidemiologists in the Era of Population-Based Neuroimaging

Cited by 4 publications

References 101 publications

Adolescent Cranial Volume as a Sensitive Marker of Parental Investment: The Role of Non-material Resources?

Adolescent Cranial Volume as a Sensitive Marker of Parental Investment: The Role of Non-material Resources?

Recommendations for the Development of Socioeconomically-Situated and Clinically-Relevant Neuroimaging Models of Pain

Sociomarkers and Connectomes: Neurodevelopmental Imprints in Adolescent Brains

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About